Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 
in  2015 


https://archive.org/details/reportofcommitte00mass_5 


Report  of  the  Committee  appointed  dndeb 
Resolves  oe  1901,  Chap.  10.1, 

TO  CONSIDER  THE 

ADVISABILITY    OF   CONSTRUCTING    A   DAM   ACROSS    I  UK 
CHARLES  lUVKK  BETWEEN  THE  CITIES  OF 
BOSTON  AND  CAMBRIDGE. 


To  the  Honorable  the  Senate  and  House  of  Representatives  of  the  Com- 
monwealth in  General  Court  assembled. 

Your  committee,  appointed  to  report  as  to  the  feasibility 
and  desirability  of  a  dam  across  the  diaries  Kiver  between 
Boston  and  Cambridge  in  the  vicinity  of  the  bridges  known 
as  (  raigie  bridge  and  West  Boston  bridge,  respectfully  sub- 
mits the  following  statement  of  its  conclusions,  together 
w  ith  the  reports  of  the  engineers  and  experts  employed  by  it. 
The  evidence  and  arguments  presented  to  the  committee  by 
those  favoring  or  objecting  to  a  dam  are  printed  in  a  separate 
volume,  which  is  submitted  herewith. 

The  work  of  the  committee  and  the  scope  of  its  investiga- 
tions have  been  determined  by  Resolves  of  1901,  chapter 
105,  as  follows  :  — 

Resolve  to  provide  for  the  appointment  of  a  committee  to 

CONSIDER  THE  ADVISABILITY  <>I  (  < )N STKUCTING  A  DAM  ACROSS 
THE  CHARLES  RIVER  BETWEEN  THE  CITIES  OF  BOSTON  AND 
CAMBRIDGE. 

Resolved,  That  the  governor,  with  the  advice  and  consent  of  the 
council,  be  authorized  and  requested  to  appoint,  not  later  than  the 
thirty-first  day  of  December,  nineteen  hundred  and  one,  a  committee, 
to  consist  of  three  or  more  suitable  persons,  one  of  whom  he  shall 
designate  as  chairman,  to  investigate  and  report  upon  the  feasibility 
and  desirability  of  constructing  and  maintaining  a  dam  across  Charles 
river  between  Boston  and  Cambridge,  in  the  vicinity  of  the  bridges 
known  as  Craigie's  bridge  and  West  Boston  bridge.  The  committee 
may  employ  such  assistance  as  may  be  necessary,  shall  give  a  hearing 
to  all  persons  desiring  to  be  heard  upon  the  subject,  and  shall  make  a 
report  of  their  doings,  with  such  recommendations  as  they  may  deem 
proper,  to  the  next  general  court.  The  committee  may  expend  such 
sums  in  the  performance  of  its  duties,  and  shall  be  allowed  such  com- 
pensation, as  the  governor  and  council  may  determine.  The  whole 
expense  of  the  committee  shall  be  borne  equally  by  the  cities  of  Boston 


6 


CHARLES  RIVER  DAM. 


and  Cambridge.  The  powers  of  tin*  committer  shall  terminate  on  the 
making  of  their  report.  If  the  committee  conclude  that  the  proposed 
dam  is  feasible  and  desirable,  they  shall  recommend  a  plan  for  appor- 
tioning the  expense  of  constructing  and  maintaining  it.  between  such 
cities  and  towns  as  will  specially  be  benefited  by  it.  and  they  shall 
annex  to  their  report  the  draft  of  a  bill  in  accordance  with  their  recom- 
mendations. The  provisions  of  this  resolye  shall  be  accepted  by  a 
majority  vote  of  the  city  councils  of  Boston  and  Cambridge  before  any 
action  can  be  taken  thereunder.     [Approved  June  13,  1901. 

An  epted  by  vote  of  the  city  councils  of  Boston  and  Cambridge, 
dated  June  24,  1901,  and  duly  3,  1901,  respectively. 

By  Resolves  of  1902,  chapter  103,  the  time  within  which 
this  committee  is  allowed  to  report  was  extended  until  the 
second  Wednesday  of  January  of  the  year  1903. 

In  accordance  with  the  provisions  of  said  resolve,  this 
committee,  between  Dec.  Hi,  1901,  and  July  2.  11)02,  gave 
public  hearings  to  all  persons  desiring  to  be  heard,  both  in 
fay  or  of  and  against  the  project ;  and  since  the  close  of  the 
hearings,  through  its  own  engineers  and  experts,  has  investi- 
gated as  fully  as  possible  all  the  questions  involved. 

Your  committee  was  soon  conyinced  that  a  considerable 
time  would  unavoidably  be  employed  in  its  investigation-. 
When  the  question  of  a  dam  was  before  the  Board  of  Harbor 
and  Land  Commissioners,  in  1894,  no  funds  were  available 
to  enable  that  Board  to  conduct  independent  examinations. 
Expert  opinions  of  a  widely  diverse  character  were  presented 
in  the  testimony  before  that  Board,  and  its  report  stated  :  — 

The  eyidence  adduced  at  the  hearing  in  fayor  of  the  plan,  so  far  as  it 
affected  the  harbor,  was  perhaps  necessarily  to  a  large  extent  desultory 
and  inconclusiye.  That  which  was  opposed  to  it  was  largely  expert 
and  other* opinion,  and  recorded  obseryations  taken  almost  if  not  quite 
wholly  from  the  reports  and  data  on  file  in  the  office  of  this  Board. 

That  Board  made  the  following  suggestion  in  reference 
to  fnrther  investigations  which  it  thought  necessary  before 
coming  to  any  conclusion  upon  the  matter  :  — 

Bearing  in  mind  that  what  is  suggested  to  be  done  may  affect  the 
welfare  of  generations  yet  unborn  for  centuries  to  come,  we  are  met  at 
the  outset  with  the  question.  "What  information  is  necessary  to  justify  the 
conclusion  that  so  permanent  a  change  can  be  made  without  detriment  ? 
In  order  to  answer  this  question  understandingly  and  with  certainty, 
knowledge  on  the  following  points  is  essential :  — 

1.  The  exact  present  condition  of  the  harbor. 

2.  Just  what  forces  are  acting  either  to  improye,  maintain  or  in  any 
way  injure  it. 

3.  What  effect  the  proposed  lock  and  dam  will  haye  upon  these 
forces. 


COMMITTEE'S  REPORT. 


7 


4.  The  causes  of  the  shoutings  that  huve  from  time  to  time  occurred 
in  the  harbor,  and  the. materia]  of  which  they  are  composed. 

o.  Whether  the  natural  bottom  of  the  upper  harbor  is  or  is  not 
abraded  by  the  currents,  and  moved  from  place  to  place. 

Comparative  studies  should  be  made  of  all  the  plana  and  records  of 

all  general  surveys  and  examinations  of  Boston  harbor  and  of  similar 
harbors,  and  to  supplement  the  informution  thus  obtained  by  further 
surveys  and  examinations  to  cover  the  portions  not  sufficiently  covered 
or  not  covered  in  sufficient  detail,  or  not  ut  all  covered. 

A  scries  of  observations  of  the  currents  should  be  made  :  as,  since 
the  current  measurements  were  made,  in  1861,  large  areas  on  the  South 
Boston  flats  and  in  Charles,  Miller's  and  Mystic  rivers  have  been  filled, 
and  the  deep-water  channels  in  the  upper  harbor  have  been  materially 
enlarged  by  dredging. 

Physical  examinations  should  be  made,  by  borings  or  otherwise,  and 
also  microscopical  and  chemical  examinations  of  the  material  com- 
posing the  bottom  of  the  harbor  to  a  depth  of  several  feet,  especially 
where  the  soundings  indicate  that  there  has  been  considerable  shoaling, 
in  order  to  assist  in  determining  the  source  and  amount  of  all  deleterious 
and  foreign  substances. 

The  foregoing  data  should  be  collected  under  the  direction  of  a  com- 
petent hydraulic  engineer,  with  the  assistance  of  an  advisory  board  of 
engineers,  before  any  conclusions  can  be  formulated  which  would  jus- 
tify so  radical  and  permanent  a  change  as  is  contemplated  in  the  pro- 
posed plan.* 

Your  committee  has  fully  carried  out  the  work  thus 
indicated  as  a  prerequisite  to  a  satisfactory  decision,  and 
in  the  chief  engineer's  report  and  the  appendices  thereto 
will  be  found  the  observations  which  are  here  called  for. 

In  addition  to  these  evidently  necessary  inquiries,  the 
committee  has  also  made  a  large  number  of  observations  in 
order  to  settle  other  questions  concerning  which  the  expert 
opinions  given  in  the  evidence  before  it  have  differed. 

This  class  of  questions  may  be,  perhaps,  illustrated  by 
one  or  two  examples. 

In  the  evidence  presented  for  and  against  the  building  of 
a  dam  there  was  a  wide  difference  of  opinion  as  to  the  effect 
of  the  salt  water  in  the  present  basin  in  cooling  the  air  of 
the  adjacent  region  during  the  hot  season.  One  set  of 
experts  claimed  that  this  basin,  filled  as  it  is  twice  daily 
with  cool  sea  water,  had  a  marked  influence  in  lowering  the 
temperature  of  the  air  over  the  city  ;  other  experts  doubted 
this  effect.  The  committee  dealt  with  this  problem  by 
placing  a  series  of  thermometers  and  thermographs  extend- 
ing from  Boston  Light  to  Norumbega  Park  ;  thermographs 
were  also  placed  in  different  parts  of  the  city.  Simulta- 
neous readings  of  all  these  instruments  were  obtained  for  a 
period  extending  through  the  two  and  one-half  months  of 


*  Report  of  15oard  of  Harbor  and  Land  Commissioners,  1891,  pp.  xv  and  xvi. 


8 


CHAELES  RIVEB  DAM. 


summer.  The  results  of  these  observations  were  conclusive 
and  final.  They  showed  that  the  cooling  influence  of  the 
basin  upon  the  atmosphere  of  the  Back  Bay  was  practically 
zero. 

Another  question,  and  a  most  important  one,  concerning 
which  the  committee  received  varying  testimony,  was  that 
of  the  quantity  of  sewage  being  emptied  into  the  present 
Charles  River  basin.  Into  this  subject  your  committee  has 
endeavored  to  go  with  completeness,  and  an  enormous 
amount  of  time  and  work  has  been  spent  upon  it.  As  is 
shown  in  the  reports  of  experts,  and  particularly  in  that 
of  the  chief  engineer,  the  sources  of  pollution  are  more 
numerous,  and  the  amount  of  sewage  emptying  into  the 
Fenway  and  thence  into  the  basin  is  greater,  than  had  been 
supposed.  The  present  Fenway  basin  is  practically  a  cess- 
pool ;  and,  without  any  regard  to  whether  a  dam  is  built  or 
not,  this  basin  should  be  freed  from  the  objectionable  sewage 
now  entering  it.  A  simple  and  effective  method  of  doing 
this  is  shown  in  the  report  of  the  chief  engineer. 

Similar  questions,  concerning  the  effect  of  a  dam  upon 
the  health  of  the  region,  its  effect  upon  the  flow  of  tides, 
and  many  others,  could  be  settled  only  by  a  careful  and 
s}rstematic  study. 

The  committee  has  found  it  necessary  to  make  extensive 
surveys.  Among  these  are  an  accurate  hydrographic  chart 
of  the  Charles  River  basin,  made  upon  a  large  scale,  and 
showing  with  exactness  the  shoals  which  have  accumulated, 
and  which  may  need  removal ;  a  geological  survey  of  the 
surroundings  of  Boston  harbor :  a  survey  of  the  region  for 
the  purpose  of  ascertaining  the  present  sources  of  malaria, 
and  those  which  might  exist  in  case  the  dam  were  built ; 
and,  Anally,  a  survey  made  from  the  stand-point  of  the 
biologist  and  bacteriologist.  In  addition,  it  has  caused  to 
be  made  a  chemical  examination  of  the  river  water  and  the 
material  entering  the  basin. 

All  of  this  work  has  required  time,  but  the  committee 
felt  assured  that  it  was  desirable  to  investigate  fully  all  these 
questions,  rather  than  to  leave  any  of  them  in  an  unsettled 
state  ;  and  it  believes  that  the  results  herein  set  forth  are 
based  upon  examinations  sufficiently  full  and  accurate  to 
afford  safe  conclusions.  The  committee  desires  to  express 
its  obligation  to  its  experts  and  engineers,  and  particularly 
its  appreciation  of  the  services  of  its  chief  engineer,  John  R. 
Freeman,  under  whose  direction  the  work  has  been  carried 
on.  The  committee  is  also  indebted  to  the  Board  of  Metro- 
politan Park  Commissioners  for  the  completion  of  that  por- 


COMMITTEE'S  REPORT. 


tion  of  the  survey  of  Charles  River  between  Essex  Street 
bridge  and  Watertown  dam  ;  and  it  desires  also  to  express 
its  appreciation  of  the  assistance  and  cordial  co-operation  it 
has  received  from  the  members  and  officers  of  the  Metro- 
politan Park  Commission,  the  State  Board  of  Health,  the 
Metropolitan  Water  and  Sewerage  Board  and  the  Board  of 
Harbor  and  Land  Commissioners  ;  from  the  officers  of  the 
United  States  Engineers'  office  and  the  Navy  Yard  ;  and 
from  the  officials  and  engineers  of  the  cities  of  Boston, 
Cambridge  and  Newton  and  the  town  of  Watertown.  All 
of  these  boards  and  officials  have  given  the  committee  all 
possible  assistance  in  its  studies  and  investigations. 

History  of  the  Project. 

The  project  of  building  a  dam  across  the  Charles  River 
has  been  discussed  since  1859.  An  act  was  passed  in  1870 
providing  for  the  establishment  of  a  Metropolitan  Park 
Commission,  for  the  purpose  of  improving  the  basin  by 
a  dam,  as  proposed  by  the  late  U.  H.  Crocker.  This  act 
was  subject  to  acceptance  by  a  two-thirds  vote  of  the 
people  of  Boston,  and  was  rejected,  as  only  a  majority  vote 
was  received. 

In  1891  Hon.  Nathan  Matthews,  then  mayor  of  Boston, 
in  his  inaugural  address  recommended  the  creation  of  a 
water  park  out  of  the  basin  ;  and,  in  view  of  the  private 
interests  involved,  suggested  that  the  whole  matter  be  con- 
sidered by  a  State  commission.  The  Charles  River  Im- 
provement Commission  was  thereupon  appointed,  under 
chapter  390  of  the  Acts  of  1891,  for  the  purpose  of  con- 
sidering what  improvements  could  be  made  in  the  Charles 
River  basin  between  the  dam  at  Watertown  and  Charles 
River  bridge  at  Boston,  and  submitted  two  reports,  dated 
Feb.  21,  1892,  and  April  20,  1893,  respectively.  Both 
reports  recommended  embankments  along  the  river.  The 
second  recommended  more  specifically  the  discontinuance  of 
the  railroad  bridges,  and  their  concentration  in  a  new  high- 
level  bridge  without  a  draw. 

The  Legislature  of  1893,  without  acting  on  these  recom- 
mendations, appointed  a  Joint  Board,  consisting  of  the 
Metropolitan  Park  Commission  and  the  State  Board  of 
Health,  with  instructions  "  to  im^estigate  the  sanitary  con-  » 
ditions,  and  prepare  plans  for  the  improvement  of  the  bed, 
shores  and  waters  of  the  Charles  River  between  the  Charles 
River  bridge  and  the  Waltham  line  on  the  Charles  River, 
and  the  removal  of  any  nuisances  therefrom."    This  Joint 


LO 


CHARLES  RIVEB  DAM. 


Board  reported  in  April  of  1894,  recommending  the  building 
of  a  dam  and  lock  about  ()00  feet  above  Craigie  bridge, 
by  which  a  constant  level  in  the  basin  would  be  maintained 
at  about  grade  8.  The  Legislature  referred  the  report  of 
this  Board  to  the  Harbor  and  Land  Commission,  with  direc- 
tions "to  inquire  into  the  construction  of  a  dam  and  lock 
in  the  tidal  basin  of  Charles  River,  as  proposed  by  the  Met- 
ropolitan Park  Commission  and  the  State  Board  of  Health, 
sitting  as  a  Joint  Board,  with  special  reference  to  inter- 
ference with  tide  water  and  its  etfect  upon  the  harbor  of 
Boston.'* 

After  holding  public  hearings,  in  1894  the  Board  of  Har- 
bor and  Land  Commissioners  reported  that :  4  k  This  Board 
is  powerless  to  say,  on  the  imperfect  information  it  has, 
what  effect  a  dam,  as  proposed,  would  have  upon  shoaling 
in  the  upper  harbor.  Upon  all  the  evidence  within  the 
knowledge  of  the  Board,  we  are  unable  to  find  the  conse- 
quences of  building  the  proposed  dam  as  at  all  certain  of 
being  foreseen  :  and,  in  view  of  the  incalculable  injury 
which  might  ensue  from  impairing  the  usefulness  of  the 
harbor,  we  are  unable  to  report  in  favor  of  the  recommenda- 
tions contained  in  the  report  of  the  Joint  Board."* 

By  chapter  531  of  the  Acts  of  1898  the  Legislature  au- 
thorized and  directed  the  Metropolitan  Park  Commission  to 
construct  and  maintain  a  dam  with  suitable  locks  across  the 
Charles  River  at  or  about  St.  Mary's  Street.  Xo  action  has 
been  taken  under  this  authority. 

In  1901  the  Legislature  authorized  the  appointment  of 
this  committee. 

The  Present  Condition  of  the  Charles  River  below 
AVatertown  Dam.  in  Relation  to  the  Park  Sys- 
tems of  the  Cities  of  Boston.  Cambridge  and 
the  Metropolitan  Park  District. 

The  Charles  River  basin  occupies  the  centre  of  the  park 
systems  of  both  Boston  and  Cambridge  and  the  metropolitan 
district,  and  its  banks  have  already  been  dedicated  to  the 
park  purposes  of  these  systems. 

On  the  Cambridge  side  of  the  river,  from  Craigie  bridge 
to  \Yatertown  dam,  the  banks  of  the  river,  with  the  excep- 
tion of  about  one-half  a  milef  in  a  length  of  nine  miles,  have 

*  Report  of  Board  of  Harbor  and  Land  Commissioners,  1S94,  pp.  xix,  xx. 

J  Fifteen  hundred  linear  feet  are  occupied  by  private  interests  of  the  Damon  Safe 
Works.  Coleman  Brothers  and  Smith  properties",  between  the  Craigie  and  West  Boston 
bridges;  and  the  entrances  to  and  properties  upon  Broad  and  Lechmere  canals  are 
also  used  for  commercial  and  manufacturing  purposes.  The  Hollingsworth  &  Whitney 
Paper  Companies,  Lewando  and  others  occupy  740  feet  in  Watertown. 


COMMITTEE'S  REPORT. 


been  dedicated  to  the  public  uses  of  the  Cambridge  and 
metropolitan  park  systems  and  the  United  States  arsenal. 
This  is  exclusive  of  the  wharves  on  Broad  and  Lechmere 
canals. 

Of  the  beach  construction,  5,240  feet  are  completed,  and 
about  6,540  feet  of  beach  and  2,500  feet  of  wall  remain  to 
be  built. 

On  the  Boston  side  of  the  river,  from  the  Craigie  bridge 
to  the  \Yatertown  dam,  the  banks,  with  the  exception  of 
one  mile  of  private  ownership,*  have  been  either  occupied 
or  authorized  to  be  occupied  for  the  public  purposes  of  the 
Charlesbank  (the  proposed  embankment  in  the  rear  of  Beacon 
Street  authorized  by  Acts  of  1893,  chapter  435),  by  the 
Bay  State  Road,  and  by  the  Metropolitan  Park  Commission. 

The  cities  of  Boston  and  Cambridge  and  the  Metropolitan 
Park  Commission  have  already  spent  $3,685,000  on  these 
park  improvements  bordering  on  the  river,  and  the  high- 
level  West  Boston  bridge,  without  a  draw,  is  now  being 
built  between  these  cities  at  a  cost  of  82, 500, 000.  This,  as 
an  architectural  and  en^ineerino-  structure,  will  be  in  har- 
mony  with  the  general  scheme  of  the  use  of  the  river  as  a 
park. 

Necessary  Improvements  if  no  Dam  is  built. 

The  diaries  River,  between  the  AVatertown  dam  and 
Craigie  bridge,  has  a  mean  rise  and  fall  of  tide  of  9.6  feet, 
with  an  extreme  predicted  range  of  13.6  feet,  which  at 
times  of  easterly  winds  and  freshet  flow  of  the  river  may  be 
increased  to  15  feet.  In  case  a  dam  is  not  built,  it  will  still 
be  necessary,  in  order  to  adapt  the  river  to  these  park  re- 
quirements, to  dredge  the  unsightly  and  unsanitary  flats  in 
the  lower  portion  of  the  river  basin  to  a  depth  of  five  feet 
below  mean  low  water.  These  flats  are  indicated  upon  the 
survey  of  the  basin  made  under  the  direction  of  this  committee. 
The  amount  and  position  of  the  excavations  to  be  made  are  in- 
dicated in  the  report  of  the  chief  engineer,  and  their  ext  ent 
and  appearance  at  low  tide  are  shown  in  the  accompanying 
photographs.  In  addition,  certain  changes  in  the  sewage 
conditions,  including  separation  of  objectionable  sewage  from 
the  Stony  Brook  channels,  extending  an  overflow  channel 
from  the  Commissioners'  channel  to  the  Charles  River,  and 
the  interception  of  the  sewage  which  conies  from  Beacon 
Street  houses,  should  be  effected  ;  the  embankment  and  Avails 


*  Costello's  Wharf,  Cousens'  Wharf,  320  linear  feet;  Brookline  Gas  Company,  500 
linear  feet ;  the  Brighton  Abattoir,  3,400  linear  feet;  and  the  Newton  &  Watertown  Gas 
Company  and  others.  1,200  linear  feet.    (Evidence  of  Mr.  de  las  Casas,  p.  24.) 


12 


CHARLES  RIVEB  DAM. 


from  Wot  Boston  bridge  to  the  westerly  line  of  the  Fenway 
should  be  built  by  the  Hoard  of  Pferk  Commissioners  of  Bos- 
ton, in  accordance  with  the  provision  of  the  Acts  of  1893, 
chapter  43f),  with  some  amendment-  hereafter  suggested  : 
the  unimproved  hanks  of  the  river  above  the  territory 
which  is  to  be  walled  must  be  dealt  with  in  a  similar  way 
to  that  adopted  by  the  Cambridge  and  metropolitan  park 
commissions  above  the  Bovlston  Street  bridge  ;  and  por- 
tions of  the  tidal  marshes  should  be  diked,  as  has  been  done 
by  the  Metropolitan  Park  Commission  between  the  Bovlston 
Street  and  Arsenal  Street  bridges.  As  the  extreme  rise  and 
fall  of  the  tide  is  about  15  feet,  these  works  will  be  neces- 
sarily expensive.  The  estimated  cost  of  this  work  above 
outlined  is  *;},<)14,000.* 

After  this  work  is  completed,  however,  the  river,  as  a 
tidal  stream,  will  still  for  half  the  time  present  an  unsightly 
and  unattractive  appearance.  Its  use  by  the  public  will  be 
limited,  and  its  possibilities  as  the  main  feature  of  the  park 
system  will  be  only  partially  utilized. 

C  onsiderations  ix  Regard  to  a  Dam. 

Under  the  resolves  of  1901,  your  committee  is  charged 
with  the  duty  of  reporting  upon  the  question  of  improving 
these  conditions  by  means  of  a  dam.  The  resolve  directs 
the  committee  to  report  upon  three  matters  involved  in  the 
erection  of  such  a  structure  : — ' 

1 .  Its  feasibility. 

2.  Its  desirability. 

3.  In  case  of  its  feasibility  and  desirability,  to  recommend 
a  plan  for  apportioning  the  expense  of  constructing  and 
maintaining  it  between  such  cities  and  towns  as  will  specially 
be  benefited  by  it,  and  to  annex  a  draft  of  a  bill  in  accord- 
ance with  its  recommendations. 

Feasibility.  —  Considered  merely  as  an  engineering 
project,  there  can  be  no  question  as  to  the  feasibility  of 
constructino'  a  dam  and  of  maintaining  a  basin  above  it  at 
constant  grade,  even  in  times  of  freshet  now  of  the  river, 


*  Cost  of  sea  wall  and  70-foot  embankment,  West  Boston  Bridge  to  Fenway, 

estimate  of  city  engineer,  1894,  for  park  department,     .            .      .    *  .  $684,000 

Cost  of  work  on  Charles  River  Reservation  by  Metropolitan  Park  Com- 
mission, including  beaching,  diking  and  roads,   1,542,000 

Cost  of  Stony  Brook  conduit  from  outlet  of  Commissioners'  channel  to 

river,  street  department,  sewer  division  (Rep.  City  Doc.  1901),    .      .      .  300,000 

Cost  of  intercepting  sewer  in  the  rear  of  Beacon  Street,   60.000 

Cost  of  dredging  fiats  in  the  Charles  River  from  the  Craigie  bridge  to  500 
feet  below  Watertown  dam  to  srrade  — 5,  estimate  bv  Percv  M.  Blake, 

civil  engineer,                                                              .  *    .  1,016,000 

Cost  of  wall  and  beach  vet  to  be  constructed  by  Cambridge  Park  Commis- 
sion, ....   *   312,000 


$3,014,000 


COMMITTEE'S  REPORT. 


13 


and  this  w  ithout  flooding  the  Buck  Bay  districts  and  without 
obstructing  the  existing  storm  sewage  overflows. 

It  will  make  the  following  report  more  clear  if  it  is  at 
once  stated  that  the  committee,  early  in  its  investigations, 
was  led  to  believe  that,  whether  such  basin  were  fresh  or 
salt,  a  dam,  if  built  at  all,  must  be  high  enough  to  keep  out 
high  tides,  and  that  it  must  be  supplied  with  a  lock  for  the 
accommodation  of  river  navigation. 

Desirability. — The  chief  reasons  for  the  construction 
of  such  a  dam  are  to  be  found  in  the  sanitary  betterment 
of  the  region  itself  and  in  the  value  which  such  a  basin  would 
have  in  relation  to  the  Boston,  Cambridge  and  metropolitan 
park  systems. 

It  would  be  a  great  addition  to  the  attractions  of  the  city, 
and  would  lend  itself  to  a  plan  of  improvement  which  in  the 
long  run  cannot  fail  to  make  Boston  one  of  the  most  beauti- 
ful cities  in  the  world.  The  creation  of  such  a  basin  would 
give  the  cities  of  Boston  and  Cambridge,  practically  without 
expense,  an  open  park  area  of  1,000  acres,  the  lower  portion 
of  which  is  situated  in  the  heart  of  the  most  congested  met- 
ropolitan district.  How  much  this  basin  will  be  used  as  a 
pleasure  park,  and  particularly  by  the  poorer  inhabitants  of 
the  city,  your  committee  feels  itself  unable  to  say.  If  the 
use  of  the  Charles  River  Gymnasium,  of  the  North  End  Park, 
of  Jamaica  Pond  and  of  Franklin  Field  in  the  winter  is.  to 
be  taken  as  a  criterion,  the  basin  would  be  of  immense 
benefit ;  and  there  is  no  reason  why  such  use  should  not  be 
made  of  it  if  rendered  accessible  and  if  the  use  of  boats  be 
made  easy  and  cheap.  The  committee  feels  that,  under 
reasonable  conditions,  it  ought  to  become  the  scene,  for  at 
least  four  or  five  months  of  the  year,  of  a  great  popular 
playground. 

There  is  no  reason  why  the  Charles  River  below  Water- 
town  dam,  with  the  water  at  a  constant  level  of  not  less 
than  grade  8,  should  not  offer  the  same  opportunity  of  use 
by  the  public  both  for  a  water  highway  and  for  purposes  of 
pleasure  and  recreation  which  is  furnished  by  the  Charles 
at  Riverside,  the  Thames  at  Henley  and  the  Alster  at  Ham- 
burg. 

As  metropolitan  Boston  grows  passenger  traffic  ought,  to 
develop  and  reach  large  proportions  on  such  a  stream. 

The  accompanying  photographs  of  the  banks  of  the  river, 
as  improved  by  the  Metropolitan  Park  Commission,  show 
that  with  low  tides  the  river  at  its  best  offers  but  little  at- 
traction to  persons  seeking  recreation  or  pleasure  upon  it  or 
in  its  vicinity.    The  currents  are  too  swift  for  any  boat 


14 


CHARLES  RIVEB  DAM. 


except  racing  craft,  and  view  from  the  river  is  generally 
limited  to  high  banks  of  rubble  or  mud.  The  pictures  of 
the  same  stretches  of  the  river  at  the  Longfellow  marshes 
and  at  Lemon  brook,  with  the  water  at  grade  S  and  with 
low  tide,  show  how  largely  its  appearance  is  dependent  on 
its  tidal  condition,  and  a  comparison  of  the  photographs  of 
the  Alster  basin  and  river  frontage  at  Hamburg  with  the 
present  views  of  the  rear  of  Beacon  Street  and  the  Cam- 
bridge Esplanade  gives  some  idea  of  the  way  in  which  the 
neglected  opportunities  of  the  Charles  River  basin  might  be 
utilized  both  for  the  convenience  and  pleasure  of  the  public 
and  for  beautifying  the  cities  of  Boston  and  Cambridge.* 

There  can  be  no  question  that  a  basin  of  clear  water,  held 
at  a  constant  level,  with  attractive  banks,  is  in  every  way 
desirable.  The  questions  which  your  committee  feels  called 
to  answer  are  :  Can  this  basin  be  kept  reasonably  sweet  and 
clean?  Can  it  be  maintained  with  advantage  to  the  sanitary 
interests  of  those  who  live  upon  the  river  banks?  Will  such 
a  basin  be  prejudicial  to  the  great  interests  of  Boston  harbor, 
or  to  possible  commercial  interests  in  Charles  River?  And, 
if  these  questions  can  be  answered  in  the  affirmative,  it  then 
remains  to  determine  whether  all  this  can  be  done  within  a 
limit  of  cost  consistent  with  a  just  public  policy. 


Sanitary  Conditions. 

The  sanitary  question  is  the  most  difficult,  and  in  some 
respects  the  most  important,  involved  in  this  inquiry,  and 
upon  it  has  been  bestowed  more  time  and  labor  than  upon 
any  other  question,  both  by  the  chief  engineer  and  by  ex- 
perts working  independently. 

This  work  has  been  done  in  the  effort  to  ascertain,  first 
of  all,  the  quantity  and  character  of  sewage  actually  going 


*  The  Charles  River  above  the  dams  is  now  crowded  with  pleasure  craft  in  spring, 
summer  and  autumn,  while  below  the  dams  little  boating  is  seen  except  the  racing 
boats,  mostly  college  ones. 

For  the  difference  between  swift,  tidal  waters  with  exposed  flats  on  the  one  hand,  and 
a  basin  of  constant  level  with  slight  currents  on  the  other  hand,  in  fostering  pleasure 
boating  we  are  not  without  instructive  examples. 

After  the  construction  of  the  half  dam  at  Richmond  on  the  Thames,  in  England,  the 
use  of  pleasure  boats  increased.  On  the  other  hand,  by  the  removal  oi  the  half  dam  on 
the  Clyde  at  Glasgow,  Scot.,  in  1879,  on  the  mistaken  theory  that  this  would  benefit  the 
harbor  by  increasing  the  scour,  "  a  good  deal  of  damage*  was  done  to  boating,  then  a 
popular  pastime  "  (evidence,  p.  457) ;  while,  on  the  rebuilding  of  the  weir,  lately  finished, 
so  as  to  prevent  further  damage  to  the  harbor,  it  is  predicted  that  it  will  "  enable  the 
citizens  to  enjov  the  use  of  the  river  for  boating." 

The  Dee  Conservancy  Board,  at  Chester,  Eng.,  reported  that  the  dam  there,  which 
keeps  out  the  ordinary  tides,  would,  if  removed,  "ruin  the  beautiful  basin  of  almost 
still  water,  which  is  immensely  enjoved  for  boating"  (evidence,  p.  456). 

We  have  another  illustration  right  at  hand.  The  Cambridge  Casino,  on  the  Charles 
River,  near  the  foot  of  Hawthorne  Street,  was  furnished  with  a  boat  house.  At  first  the 
boats  and  canoes  were  used  zealouslv,  but  the  strong  currents  and  the  high,  muddy 
banks,  at  all  times  below  half  tide  soon  discouraged  boating,  and  later,  boating  practi- 
cally ceased.  The  canoes  were  all  removed,  most  of  them  to  the  upper  parts  of  the  river, 
with  constant  level  and  slight  currents,  though  much  farther  from  the  owners'  homes 
than  the  tide  water  at  the  Casino. 


COMMITTEE'S  REPORT. 


L5 


into  the  basin,  the  sources  <>t'  this  sewage  and  the  possible 
means  of  its  exclusion. 

Next,  the  question  of  the  deposits  already  made  in  the 
basin,  from  sewage  which  has  been  coming  into  it  in  the 
past,  was  investigated. 

Following  this  inquiry,  the  experts  and  engineers  of  the 
committee  took  up  the  study  of  the  question  as  to  whether 
fresh  or  salt  water  permitted  better  sanitary  condition  -  ; 
the  effect  of  each  upon  the  bacterial  life  in  the  basin  was 
studied,  and  examinations  were  made  to  test,  in  each  case, 
prevalence  of  mosquitoes  and  the  consequent  effect  upon 
inducing  malaria. 

These  studies  of  a  biological  character  were  accompanied 
constantly  by  thorough  chemical  tests,  so  that  the  experts 
of  the  committee  have  endeavored  by  all  scientific  methods 
to  study  the  problems  involved  in  the  formation  and  sani- 
tary maintenance  of  such  a  basin  from  every  point  of  view. 

The  results  of  these  examinations  are  found  in  the  series  of 
reports  made  by  the  chief  engineer  and  the  several  experts, 
and  are  printed  as  appendices  to  this  report. 

Thf-  Present  Condition  of  the  Basin . 

In  considering  the  question,  the  present  sanitary  condition 
of  the  basin  must  be  borne  in  mind.  There  are  in  the  basin 
to-day  unsanitary  conditions,  which  must  be  remedied  even 
if  a  dam  is  not  built. 

The  Fenway. — The  influx  of  sewage  into  the  Fenway 
has  transformed  this  body  of  Avater  from  a  water  park  into 
a  drainage  canal.  The  Fens  were  not  offensive  as  long  as 
Stony  Brook  discharged  through  its  old  channel,  in  accord- 
ance with  the  original  plans  of  the  park  department,  and 
the  present  conditions  have  been  largely  caused  by  the 
building  of  the  new  Commissioners'  channel.  The  present 
conditions  are  a  nuisance  to  the  people  living  in  the  vicin- 
ity, and  destroy  the  usefulness  and  beauty  of  the  Fens  as 
part  of  the  park  system.  The  objectionable  sewage  at 
present  entering  at  various  points  in  both  the  old  and  new 
channels  of  Stony  Brook  should  be  removed.  The  necessity 
for  immediate  relief  is  fully  set  forth  in  the  report  of  the 
street  department,  sewer  division,  of  the  city  of  Boston  for 
1901,  in  which  it  is  proposed  to  construct  a  12-foot  channel 
from  the  present  Commissioners  channel  to  the  Charles 
River,  at  an  expense  of  $300,000.  While  this  solution  of 
the  difficulty  will  relieve  the  Fens,  it  will  transfer  the  trouble 
to  the  river  basin  at  the  present  outlet  of  the  Fens. 


CHAKLES  RIVEB  DAM. 


The  Main  Basin. 

Direct  sewage  now  enters  from  the  houses  on  the  water  side 
of  Beacon  Street  which  should  be  cut  out.  There  exist  in  the 
main  basin  large  areas  of  flats  covered  with  sewage  mud,  which 
are  exposed  at  low  tide,  and  which  the  Board  of  Health  of 
the  city  regard  as  a  "well-recognized  public  nuisance." 
These  should  all  be  dredged,  if  there  is  to  be  no  dam. 
There  is  a  discharge  of  the  combined  overflow  sewage  in  times 
of  storm  from  the  sewerage  systems  of  Boston  and  Cam- 
bridge which  should  be  stopped  or  curtailed  as  soon  as 
possible  by  the  introduction  of  the  separate  sewerage  sys- 
tem, already  begun  in  Cambridge  and  officially  recommended 
by  the  sewage  division  of  the  street  department  of  the  city 
of  Boston  in  its  report  for  1901.  There  are  numerous  breed- 
ing-places for  mosquitoes  which  ought  to  be  removed. 

Conclusions. 

Basing  its  conclusions  on  the  study  of  these  conditions 
and  on  the  reports  of  its  engineer  and  special  experts,  the 
committee  finds  as  follows  :  — 

Fresh  water,  gallon  for  gallon,  disposes  in  a  normal  manner 
of  more  sewage  than  salt  water  ;  the  tendency  of  salt  water 
is  rapidly  to  precipitate  sewage  in  sludge  at  the  bottom. 

For  the  proper  disposition  of  sewage  in  water,  it  is  essen- 
tial that  the  water  be  well  supplied  with  oxygen.  This  i? 
accomplished  by  the  contact  of  its  surface  with  the  air,  and: 
this  surface  water  is  carried  down  by  the  action  of  the  waves 
and  currents,  and  especially  by  the  vertical  movement  caused 
by  changes  of  temperature.  Bodies  of  fresh,  nearly  still 
water  are  well  oxygenated  to  a  depth  of  25  feet  or  more  in 
ordinary  summer  weather,  and  to  much  greater  depths  with 
the  autumn  cold.  Xo  considerable  part  of  the  basin,  with  a 
permanent  level  at  grade  8  or  9,  would  be  over  25  feet  in 
depth. 

Letting  in  salt  water  under  the  fresh  interferes  with  the 
vertical  circulation  necessary  for  oxygenation,  and  the  salt 
water  under  the  fresh  soon  loses  its  oxygen  if  any  waste 
material  is  admitted  into  it. 

Changing  a  fresh  water  basin  into  a  salt  from  time  to  time 
interferes  with  the  bacterial  animal  and  vegetable  growths, 
which  effectively  aid  in  taking  care  of  and  digesting  sewage. 

A  comparatively  still  body  of  fresh  water  with  animal 
and  plant  growths  will  dispose  of  a  considerable  amount  of 
sewage  admitted  from  time  to  time,  and  will  tend  to  purify 
itself,  even  if  no  more  fresh  water  is  added. 


(O.MMITTKKS  REPORT. 


17 


Such  a  bod}'  of  fresh  water  will  di.spo.se  of  more  sewage 
if  comparatively  still  than  if  in  motion. 

Most  of  the  sewers  in  Cambridge  and  practically  all  in 
Boston  carry  both  house  sewage  and  storm  water  in  the 
same  conduits,  which  are  called  "  combined  sewers."  These 
all  connect  with  the  intercepting  sewers  of  the  metropolitan 
system  on  both  sides  of  the  river  leading  into  the  lower  part 
of  Boston  harbor ;  and  in  dry  weather  the  metropolitan 
sewers  take  all  the  sewage,  none  of  which  goes  into  the 
basin  with  the  exception  of  the  sewers  to  the  houses  on  the 
water  side  of  Beacon  Street,  and  some  emptying  into  Stony 
Brook  which  find  their  way  into  the  Fenway.  The  metro- 
politan sewers  are  not  nearly  large  enough,  however,  to 
take  both  the  house  sewage  and  that  very  much  larger  body 
of  liquid  called  the  storm  water  in  times  of  heavy  rains  and 
rapidly  melting  snows  ;  and  the  surplus  of  this  mixed  storm 
water  and  house  sewage,  called  the  "storm  overflow,"  is 
emptied  into  the  basin,  excepting  when  the  storm  water  is 
small  in  amount. 

The  amount  of  house  sewage  that  thus  finds  its  way  into 
the  basin  during  times  of  storm,  while  not  nearly  as  great 
as  7  per  cent.,*  as  contended  by  some  authorities,  is  found 
by  careful  measurement  and  observation  to  amount,  at  the 
dry  season  of  the  year,  to  not  less  than  3  per  cent,  of  the 
total  volume  of  sewage.  This  is  somewhat  more  than  sup- 
posed by  other  authorities.  The  sewers  of  AVatertown, 
Newton  and  parts  of  Brookline  are  on  the  separate  plan, 
in  which  all  rain  water  is  turned  into  the  natural  water 
channels  and  there  are  no  overflows  of  house  sewage  into 
the  river. 

Although  the  amount  of  fresh  water  coming  over  and 
through  the  AVatertown  dam  is  found  b}'  careful  measure- 
ments to  seldom  average  less  than  70  cubic  feet  per  second 
for  the  24  hours  in  dry  seasons,  there  is  good  reason  to 
believe  this  is  sometimes  reduced  to  30  cubic  feet  a  second, 
for  a  month  at  a  time,  by  storage  in  mill  ponds  while  tur- 
bines are  shut  down. 

The  water  coming  over  the  AVatertown  dam  is  well  sup- 
plied with  oxygen,  nearly  colorless,  and,  except  in  the 
driest  weather,  nearly  fit  for  a  water  supply  :  the  only 
wastes  polluting  it,  and  which  in  dry  weather  somewhat 
diminish  its  purity,  are  chiefly  from  factories  at  AVatertown 
and  AValtham,  and  can  be  removed. 

Notwithstanding  the  amount  of  sewage  that  enters  the 
basin  even  at  present,  and  including  that  which  conies  from 


*  The  Cariibridtfe  sewer  clocks  have  not  been  relied  on  as  furnishing  fival  data  for 
the  reasons  stated  in  the  engineer's  report. 


18 


CHARLES  RIVEB  DAM. 


the  Fens  and  from  the  Beacon  Street  houses  ( the  total  amount 
of  which  sewage  our  engineer  estimates  as  equivalent  to  the 
constant  discharge  of  from  5,000  to  8,000  people),  it  is  the 
unanimous  opinion  of  the  engineers  and  experts  of  the  com- 
mittee that  a  fresh-water  basin,  owing  to  its  supply  of  ox- 
ygen and  large  area,  would  not  affect  injuriously  the  health 
of  the  inhabitants  in  the  neighborhood. 

Malaria  is  only  spread  from  person  to  person  by  means 
of  the  anopheles  mosquito.  This  mosquito  breeds  only  in 
small  pools  of  fresh  or  partially  salt  water:  it  does  not 
breed  in  a  large  basin,  with  properly  constructed  shores 
open  to  the  winds,  and  supplied  with  fish,  even  if  the  water 
is  fresh.  There  are  now,  however,  many  breeding-places 
of  this  mosquito  on  the  borders  of  and  near  Charles  River, 
which  have  been  located. 

It  is  not  true,  as  has  been  contended  before  the  com- 
mittee, that  there  is  a  large  inflow  into  the  Charles  River 
basin  of  salt  water  direct  from  the  ocean  twice  every  twenty- 
five  hours.  A  study  of  the  currents  shows  that  the  water 
near  Harvard  bridge  at  high  tide  cannot  come  from  the 
ocean  direct,  but  at  the  best  from  the  upper  middle  harbor 
as  it  was  at  the  preceding  low  tide  :  and  this  is  made  up  of 
what  came  from  the  Charles  and  Mystic  rivers  with  the  pre- 
ceding ebb,  mixed  with  what  sea  water  staved  in  the  eddies 
and  lagoons  or  was  retained  between  the  wharves  from  the 
high  tide  preceding  that.  A  good  deal  more  of  the  water 
making  up  the  body  of  high  tide  at  Harvard  bridge  comes 
from  points  still  less  remote.  In  short,  the  water  in  the 
estuary  of  the  Charles  surges  back  and  forth  day  after  day, 
and  only  gradually  finds  its  way  to  the  sea  :  the  water  at 
hio-h  tide  near  the  Harvard  bridge  is  on  the  average  8 
degrees  warmer  than  at  Boston  Light  ;  when  examined  bac- 
terially,  it  is  not  superior,  if  it  is  equal  in  purity,  to  the  water 
at  the  same  place  at  low  tide  when  there  is  no  sewer  over- 
flow going  on  :  it  is  not  as  pure  a*  the  water  coming  over 
the  Watertown  dam. 

Examined  chemically,  the  high-tide  water  at  Harvard 
bridge  is  somewhat  better  than  the  low-tide  water ;  and  the 
incoming  sea  water  at  Craigie  bridge  is  about  the  same 
chemically  as  the  water  at  the  Watertown  dam,  except  that 
the  latter  in  summer  weather  is  at  present  somewhat  injured 
by  certain  factory  wastes,  which  can  be  removed,  as  already 
stated. 

It  is  not  true,  as  contended,  that  the  salt-water  basin,  as 
now  existing,  lowers  the  temperature  of  the  air  in  the  terri- 
tory adjacent  to  it  in  warm  weather.    A  most  thorough  and 


COMMITTEE'S  REPORT. 


in 


long-continued  series  of  tests  with  recording  thermometers 
has  amply  proved  this.  The  substitution  of  fresh  water 
would  have  no  effect  upon  the  temperature  of  the  air,  this 
being  controlled  by  the  direction  and  force  of  the  prevailing 
winds.  The  water  temperature  would  undoubtedly  be  raised 
from  3  to  4  degrees  as  shown  by  the  engineer's  report. 

The  level  of  the  ground  water  in  the  Back  Bay  would  not 
be  raised  by  maintaining  the  level  of  the  proposed  basin  at 
grade  8.  The  building  of  a  tight  wall  with  an  embankment 
behind  it,  and  the  construction  of  a  marginal  sewer,  emptying 
at  grade  (5,  below  the  dam,  into  which  some  of  the  ground 
water  could  be  drained  in  the  immediate  vicinity,  would 
probably  enable  the  basin  to  be  maintained  at  grade  'J, 
should  it  prove  advisable,  without  interfering  in  any  way 
with  the  ground- water  level  in  the  Back  Bay.  The  old  mill 
dam  under  Beacon  Street  was  practically  water-tight,  and 
the  ground  level  beyond  it  seems  to  be  chiefly  controlled 
by  leakage  into  the  sewers. 

The  combined  sewers  flowing  from  the  Back  Bay  and  from 
certain  of  the  lower  parts  of  Cambridge,  in  case  of  heavy 
rains  during  high  tide,  back  up  into  and  overflow  the  cellars 
of  the  houses  to  an  extent  that  is  a  constant  menace  to  the 
residents.  If  a  permanent  grade  of  8  or  9  were  maintained 
in  the  basin,  this  nuisance  and  danger  to  health  would  be 
removed. 

The  Fens  basin  furnishes  no  criterion  for  the  condition 
of  the  large  basin,  nor  of  the  Fens,  if  both  were  main- 
tained as  fresh-water  basins  at  a  permanent  level,  even 
under  present  conditions  of  sewer  overflow.  The  Fens  basin 
has  far  too  little  fresh  water  either  in  it  or  flowing  into  it 
in  dry  weather  properly  to  care  for  the  amount  of  sewage 
and  waste  admitted.  The  present  circulation  of  salt  water 
from  the  Charles  River,  as  now  established  and  carried  on, 
is  only  about  30  per  cent,  of  what  the  authorities  supposed 
when  they  testified  at  the  hearings  ;  and  this  partially  salt 
water  stays  under  about  2  feet  of  fresh,  loses  all  its  oxygen 
and  rapidly  precipitates  sewage  sludge,  which  is  in  a  state 
of  fermentation  with  anaerobic  bacteria,  and  emits  nauseous 
gases.  The  condition  is  worse  than  if  no  salt  water  were 
admitted. 

In  the  main  basin  the  appearance  during  storm  oycrflows 
is  often  worse  than  the  reality,  as  the  turbid  fresh  water 
floats  over  the  salt  in  rather  thin  layers.  If  the  basin  were 
fresh,  that  condition  would  not  exist. 

With  the  introduction  of  the  new  high-level  sewer  of  the 
metropolitan  system  on  the  Boston  side,  which  will  be  tin- 


20 


CHARLES  RIVER  DAM. 


[shed  in  Less  than  two  years,  the  amount  of  Sewage  entering 
the  basin  will  be  niueh  less  than  at  present. 

The  Effect  of  a  Dam  on  Boston  Harbor. 

In  undertaking  this  study  your  committee  found  itself 
obliged  to  enter  a  wide  field  of  investigation. 

In  the  appendices  to  this  report  will  be  found,  in  the  first 
place,  a  study  of  the  geological  character  and  history  of  the 
harbor  and  its  present  condition,  explained  from  a  geological 
point  of  view  :  secondly,  a  study  ot  the  supposed  shoaling 
and  of  the  existing  currents,  measured  not  only  at  the  sur- 
face but  at  various  depths,  and  especially  near  the  bottom  ; 
and,  lastly,  a  consideration  of  the  problem  from  the  point 
of  view  of  modern  engineers. 

The  work  suggested  by  the  Board  of  Harbor  and  Land 
Commissioners  in  their  report  of  1894  as  necessary  for  a 
proper  determination  of  the  questions  involved  has  been  car- 
ried out. 

First,  it  may  be  said  that  Boston  harbor  has  no  sand  bars 
and  hooks  at  its  entrance,  like  New  York  harbor  and  almost 
all  the  other  harbors  farther  south.  The  Broad  Sound  bar 
throngh  which  an  entrance  is  soon  to  be  dredged,  is  com- 
posed of  clay,  sand,  gravel  and  boulders ;  and  the  sand 
beaches  in  Massachusetts  Bay,  both  north  and  south,  are  in 
coves  with  rocky  headlands.  Arguments  drawn  from  sandy 
harbors  are,  therefore,  not  applicable  to  that  of  Boston. 

Sand  from  the  submerged  drumlins  and  the  islands  of  the 
lower  harbor,  which  were  formerly  being  washed  away  into 
the  surrounding  water,  but  are  now  praetically  all  guarded 
by  stone  structures  built  by  the  United  States  government, 
no  longer  comes  in  as  formerly. 

In  going  on  with  the  study  of  this  problem  more  in  detail, 
the  committee  found  itself  face  to  face  with  a  long-accepted 
theory  of  the  maintenance  of  Boston  harbor,  which,  in  the 
end,  it  has  felt  obliged  to  reject. 

This  theory  was  accepted  by  the  United  States  Commis- 
sion on  Boston  Harbor,  which,  from  1859  to  1866,  made 
ten  reports  to  the  city  of  Boston  on  this  subject.  The 
theory  adopted  was  that  of  the  so-called  "tidal  scour;"  and 
under  it  improvement  of  the  harbor  should  be  so  conducted 
as  to  maintain  and  even  increase  the  tidal  prism  in  reserve, 
the  action  of  which  was  supposed  to  be  necessary  to  main- 
tain the  depth  of  the  channels  in  the  harbor. 

In  1866,  when  the  last  of  these  reports  was  made,  Boston 
harbor  was  still  a  natural  one,  with  practically  no  improve- 


COMMITTEE'S  REPORT. 


21 


mcnt  by  way  of  dredging.  There  were  portions  of  the  upper 
main  ship  channel  which  k- had  a  least  depth  of  18  fee t  at 
mean  Low  water,  with  a  least  width  of  100  feet;"*  and  in 
1 8i>4.  when  the  Board  of  Harbor  and  Land  Commissioners 
made  its  report,  there  were  portions  of  the  channel  with  a 
minimum  depth  of  23  feet  and  a  least  width  of  625  feet. 

The  present  project  of  the  United  States  government,  that 
of  1902,  under  which  w  ork  is  now  being  conducted  and  for 
which  appropriations  have  been  made,  includes  the  making 
of  a  new  entrance  to  Boston  harbor  across  the  bar  of  Broad 
sound,  1,500  feet  wide,  with  a  minimum  depth  of  35  feet 
at  mean  Ioav  water,  and  a  channel  thence  to  the  Navy  Yard, 
with  a  minimum  width  of  1,200  feet  and  the  same  minimum 
depth. 

For  the  future,  Boston  harbor  will  be  an  artificial  one. 
The  great  extent  of  the  dredging  already  clone  and  proposed 
in  the  main  ship  channel,  in  comparison  with  the  undredged 
area,  is  clearly  shown  on  a  map  annexed.  The  natural  con- 
ditions have  been  so  altered  by  dredging  that  such  equilibrium 
of  forces  as  maintained  the  original  channels  has  been  en- 
tirely destroyed. 

The  modern  steam  dredge,  the  air  drill  and  high  explosives 
have  so  increased  the  efficiency  and  diminished  the  cost  of 
labor  that  engineers  can  now  accomplish  more  than  could 
have  been  done  in  1866.  The  shoaling,  then  feared,  would 
no  longer  be  an  irreparable  injury.  The  wealth  of  the  com- 
munity and  the  value  of  its  commercial  and  wharf  interests 
are  so  great  as  to  have  completely  changed  the  relation  of 
the  harbor  dredging  to  shore  improvements. 

While  these  considerations  are  quite  enough  to  lead  your 
committee  to  believe  that  it  is  no  longer  necessary  to  main- 
tain the  tidal  reservoirs  intact,  yet  it  deems  it  its  duty  to 
consider  further  the  original  theory  of  tidal  scour,  as  pre- 
sented by  the  commission  of  1859—66;. 

The  commission  of  1859—66  advanced  the  fundamental 
theory  that:  "Were  these  reservoirs  [the  basins  of  the 
Charles  and  Mystic  rivers  and  Chelsea  Creek]  closed,  the 
larger  part  of  this  main  artery  [the  ship  channel  of  Boston 
upper  harbor]  would  in  the  course  of  time  cease  to  exist, 
for  it  is  but  the  trench  dug  through  the  yielding  bed  of  the 
harbor  by  the  passage  to  and  fro  of  the  river  and  tidal 
waters."  (Tenth  report,  Boston  City  Document  No.  50, 
1866,  p.  50.)  This  statement  is  quoted  in  the  report  of 
the  Board  of  Harbor  and  Land  Commissioners  of  1894. 


*  Report  at  Chief  of  Engineers,  U.  S.  A.,  1902,  p.  98. 


22 


CHARLES  RIVER  DAM. 


That  fundamental  theory,  once  adopted,  naturally  affected 
the  conclusions  of  the  United  States  Commission.  That 
theory,  however,  we  find  to  be  wholly  erroneous. 

It  is  now  clearly  shown  that  the  main  channels  of  Boston 
harbor  did  not  originate  from  the  scour  of  the  tidal  waters, 
but  are  valleys  eroded  by  the  rivers  in  the  broad,  deep 
deposit  of  blue  clay  laid  down  near  the  close  of  the  glacial 
epoch,  when  the  land  was  higher  than  now,  and  since  sub- 
merged during  the  slow  subsidence  of  all  this  district.  These 
rivers  were  then  much  larger  than  now,  owing  to  the  melting 
snow  and  ice  on  the  retreat  of  the  glaciers.  In  other  words, 
the  harbor  channels  are  strictly  what  may  be  called  a  series 
of  drowned  valleys. 

It  is  important  to  note  that  the  conclusions  of  the  United 
States  Commission  as  to  the  scour  in  Boston  harbor  rested 
largel}'  upon  the  experiments  of  the  Dutch  engineer,  Dubuat, 
made  in  1780.  These  experiments  were  carried  on  in  a 
wooden  channel  18  inches  wide,  with  water  less  than  1  foot 
deep,  and  are  of  little  significance  when  extended  to  large 
streams  or  large  channels  acting  upon  natural  compact  ma- 
terials.* 

The  Board  of  Harbor  and  Land  Commissioners,  in  the 
report  of  1894,  p.  xvii,  also  seem  to  have  followed  the 
United  States  Commission,  for  they  say:  44  From  these 
[current  observations]  it  appears  that  the  velocities  of  ebb 
and  flood  currents  rarely  exceed  1  mile  an  hour  between 
Boston  and  East  Boston.  According  to  Dubuat,  a  velocity 
of  .15  of  a  mile  an  hour  is  4  sufficient  to  remove  clay  fit  for 
potter}','  with  which  the  stiff  clays  forming  the  natural  bed 
of  portions  of  the  harbor  are  classed." 

The  velocity  of  currents  necessary  for  erosion  in  natural 
conditions,  as  found  by  the  engineer  of  the  committee  and 
by  Mr.  Hiram  F.  Mills,  in  actual  practice  are  much  greater 
than  the  velocities  given  by  Dubuat. 

In  this  matter  we  are  not  entirely  dependent  upon  theory. 
The  bottom  of  Boston  harbor  is  covered  with  an  average 
depth  of  from  ()  inches  to  5  feet  of  light,  sandy  mud.  This 
appears  everywhere  excepting  where  dredging  has  taken 
place,  showing  that  the  currents  are  too  feeble  even  to  erode 
this  softer  material  enough  to  leave  bare  the  original  hard 
bottom.  The  Board  of  Harbor  and  Land  Commissioners, 
in  their  report  in  1895,  say  :  — 

44  Out  in  the  harbor  all  the  material  dredged  excepting 
the  places  at  the  mouth  of  the  Charles  River  previously 


*  Dubuat  himself  suggests  this  difference,  which  suggestion  both  the  commission  of 
X866  and  the  Harbor  and  Land  Commissioners  of  1894  seem  to  have  overlooked. 


COMMITTEE'S  REPORT. 


described  in  the  report  has  been  sand,  clay,  gravel  or  hard- 
pan.  The  channels  so  dredged  maintain  their  depths,  and 
it  lias  not  been  necessary  to  redredge  them  except  in  two 
cases.  ...  In  almost  ever}r  ease  where  dredging  is  done  in 
the  harbor,  there  is  found  on  the  surface  a  black  deposit  of 
varying  thickness,  but  not  exceeding  one  foot."  (Sen.  1  >oc. 
303,  L895.) 

Jt  is  important  to  note  that  tidal  scour  is  an  advantage 
only  when  under  exactly  the  right  conditions.  There  arc 
well-known  instances  of  harbors  with  little  or  no  tide  or 
river  currents  that  have  maintained  their  depths  far  better 
than  other  harbors  with  strong  currents.  Whatever  is 
eroded  from  one  place  finds  lodgment  in  another,  and  the 
place  of  settlement  often  turns  out  to  be  in  some  of  the 
broader  parts  of  the  lower  harbor,  or  at  its  mouth. 

An  instance  of  this  appears  in  the  case  of  the  Clyde  at 
Glasgow.  The  old  weir  or  half  dam  in  the  upper  reaches 
was  removed  in  1879  for  the  express  purpose  of  benefiting 
the  harbor  by  increasing  the  scour.  Jt  worked  so  badly 
and  caused  so  much  damage  and  expense  that  the  weir  has 
been  rebuilt  solely  for  the  purpose  of  preventing  the  dam- 
age that  was  being  done  to  the  harbor  by  currents  (see  evi- 
dence, p.  457). 

The  Thames  Conservancy  Board  predicted,  about  eight 
years  ago,  that  the  half  dam,  then  about  to  be  built  at  Rich- 
mond, and  which  would  cut  off  a  large  part  of  the  tidal 
prism,  would  result  in  serious  shoaling  below.  That  Board 
now  states  kt  Its  effect  upon  the  regime  of  the  river  as  a 
whole  cannot  be  said  to  be  injurious"  (see  evidence,  pp. 
384,  385). 

The  Charles  and  Mystic  rivers  are  not  silt-bearing  streams, 
and  what  little  silt  may  be  found  in  the  lower  Charles,  from 
street  wash  and  the  like,  will  be  kept  out  of  the  harbor  by 
the  settling  basin  formed  by  building  the  dam. 

Mystic  Lake,  near  the  mouth  of  the  Mystic  River,  is 
deeper  than  any  part  of  Boston  harbor.  That  it  has  main- 
tained this  great  depth  is  clear  proof  of  the  small  amount 
of  silt  that  has  come  from  the  river. 

The  Board  of  Harbor  and  Land  Commissioners,  in  their 
report  of  1894,  called  attention  to  the  apparent  deepening 
of  Boston  harbor  between  1835  and  1861,  and  the  apparent 
shoaling  from  1861  to  1892,  during  which  period  the  tidal 
reservoir  was  so  greatly  reduced  by  the  filling  in  of  the 
Back  Bay  (pp.  xvii'  xviii,  report  of  1894). 

That  there  has  been  no  such  shoaling  is  conclusively 
proved  by  borings  which  this  committee  has  caused  to  be 


CHARLES  RIVER  DAM. 


made,  at  places  where  this  shoaling  is  supposed  to  have  taken 
place  :  and  the  samples  show  the  ancient  mud.  hereafter 
spoken  of,  at  less  than  the  average  depth  in  Boston  harbor, 
overlying  the  old  clays  dating  from  the  end  of  the  glacial 
period  :  and  this  notwithstanding  that  the  tidal  prism 
of  the  harbor  above  Governor's  Island  has  been  greatly 
diminished. 

(ieological  observations  show  that  the  accumulated  silt  or 
Bandy  mud,  so  universal  on  the  bottom  of  Boston  harbor,  is 
very  ancient,  covering  in  its  growth  climatic  changes  and 
changes  in  the  level  of  Boston  harbor  shown  by  the  presence 
of  varieties  of  shells  no  longer  living  north  of  Cape  Cod,  and 
the  interstratirieation  of  this  silt  with  peat  in  the  surrounding 
territory.  That  the  process  ol  accumulation  is  very  slow  is 
shown  by  the  estimate  that  it  has  taken  five  thousand  years 
to  gather  together  from  2  to  5  feet,  and  there  has  been  no 
tendency  to  wash  any  of  this  out  to  sea  by  the  action  of  the 
currents  at  the  bottom. 

Another  most  important  theory,  on  which  the  commission 
of  1859-66  based  its  report,  is  that  of  the  "  seaward  gain  n 
of  the  currents  in  the  harbor.  In  the  tenth  report,  p.  52, 
also  cited  in  the  report  of  the  Board  of  Harbor  and  Land 
Commissioners  in  1894,  it  is  said  :  "A  grain  of  sand  would 
daily  make  two  journeys,  one  up  river,  represented  by  3.15 
hours,  in  which  velocity  exceeded  .3  mile  per  hour,  the  other 
seaward,  bv  5.18.  The  seaward  <rain  *s  therefore  fullv  in 
the  proportion  of  5  to  3  ;  there  is,  then,  at  this  point  power 
sufficient  to  keep  the  channel  free.  .  .  .  Except  for  the 
tides  hurrying  through  this  avenue  to  and  from  the  basin 
above,  the  present  good  depth  of  water  could  not  be  main- 
tained.'' 

It  is  true  there  is  a  seaward  gain  of  the  currents  as  meas- 
ured near  the  surface,  though  the  proportion  of  5  to  3  is 
not  established  by  any  current  measurements  recorded  by 
that  commission  or  that  we  find  now,  nor  b}r  an}7  excess 
caused  by  the  fresh- water  flow  of  the  river,  called  tk  back 
water,"  of  which  we  now  have  accurate  measurements  not 
known  to  the  earlier  commission.  But,  measured  from  the 
bottom,  where  the  erosion  takes  place,  the  gain  is  not  sea- 
ward, but  landward.  This  seems  to  be  explained  by  the 
fact  that,  with  a  flood  tide,  the  cold  and  heavier  salt  water 
dips  under  the  warmer  and  brackish  water  and  keeps  nearer 
the  bottom.  (  See  chart  of  current  curves  in  the  appendices 
to  the  engineer's  report.) 

It  is  due  to  the  United  States  commission  of  1859-66 
to  say  that  at  the  time  of  their  report  physical  data  were 


COMMITTEE'S  REPORT. 


25 


very  incomplete,  the  glacial  theory  had  not  been  developed, 
and  instruments  of  measurement  were  far  less  accurate  than 
at  present.  It  is  not  surprising,  therefore,  that  this  com- 
mission, reporting  nearly  forty  years  ago,  should  have  been 
led  into  a  wrong  hypothesis  as  to  the  origin  of  Boston 
harbor. 

Your  committee  has  gone  into  this  whole  question  with  the 
conviction  that  no  enterprise  should  be  undertaken  in  Boston 
or  vicinity  that  would  affect  in  any  unfavorable  manner  the 
future  of  Boston  harbor.  It  believes  that  this  great  harbor 
i-  a  vital  factor  in  the  commercial  development,  not  of 
Boston  and  Massachusetts  alone,  but  of  the  whole  country  : 
but  it  feels  convinced  that  benefit  rather  than  harm  will 
come  to  the  harbor  from  the  erection  of  a  dam,  and  that, 
should  any  shoaling  occur,  it  will  be  small  and  of  light 
material,  and  can  easily  be  removed  under  the  modern 
methods  of  dredging  at  small  expense. 

Commercial  Interests. 

The  traffic  on  the  Charles  River  in  the  delivery  of  coal 
and  other  material,  either  to  wharves  upon  the  river  itself 
or  upon  the  canals  in  Cambridge,  is  one  that  your  committee 
feels  should  be  preserved,  whether  this  traffic  is  at  present 
large  or  small,  or  whether  it  is  increasing  or  diminishing. 

The  construction  of  a  dam  with  a  proper  system  of  locks 
and  with  such  dredging  as  is  indicated  below  will,  in  the 
judgment  of  the  committee,  rather  facilitate  than  hinder  this 
traffic.  The  formation  of  ice  in  the  winter  will  be  a  pos- 
sible objection,  and  an  estimate  of  the  probable  expenditure 
necessary  to  protect  the  annual  traffic  has  been  prepared. 

In  view  of  the  recommendation  of  the  Craigie  bridge  as 
the  site  of  the  dam,  the  committee  has  considered  the  need 
of  sufficient  room  for  manceuverino:  vessels  between  that 
bridge  and  the  Lowell  Railroad  freight  bridge,  immediatelv 
below.  The  evidence  submitted  to  the  committee  is  that  a 
space  of  320  feet  is  necessary,  and  the  committee  finds  that 
the  requisite  space  can  be  obtained  by  moving  the  Boston 
&  Maine  Railroad  freight  bridge  slightly  to  the  east,  and 
recommends  that  400  feet  be  secured,  if  practicable. 

As  the  railroad  company  is  under  contract  with  the  fed- 
eral government  to  renew  its  present  pile  bridges  with 
modern  structures  at  an  early  day,  the  committee  recom- 
mends that  the  railroad  be  required  to  locate  their  new 
bridges  in  such  a  manner  as  to  give  the  requisite  space. 

Counsel  for  property  owners  on  Broad  and  Lechmere 


26 


CHARLES  RIVEK  DAM. 


canals  have  submitted  to  the  connnittee  a  stipulation  of  cer- 
tain conditions  which  they  regard  as  essential,  with  reference 
to  the  size  of  the  locks,  dredging  the  canals,  the  maintenance 
of  the  sea-walls  on  the  canals,  and  maintaining  the  canals 
tree  from  ice  in  the  winter.  These  conditions,  so  far  as 
they  refer  to  free  maintenance  of  locks  large  enough  to  ac- 
commodate the  largest  vessels  which  will  be  used  on  the 
Charles,  and  the  maintenance  of  access  to  the  canals  free 
from  ice,  should  be  complied  with  :  and,  in  consideration 
of  the  possible  future  development  of  commerce,  the  com- 
mittee would  recommend  locks  of  even  greater  width  than 
those  suggested  by  the  engineers  of  the  proprietors. 

The  Broad  canal  is  owned  by  the  proprietors  of  the  banks 
as  tenants  in  common  under  an  agreement  dated  in  1806, 
by  which  they  are  authorized  to  maintain  a  canal  at  a  depth 
of  1»  feet,  and  they  undoubtedly  have  certain  riparian  rights 
of  access  to  tide  water.  Anv  act  authorizing  the  building 
of  a  dam  should  contain  a  provision  that  the  owners  of  pri- 
vate property  on  the  river  above  the  dam  should  recover 
damages  for  any  injury  occasioned  to  their  property  by 
reason  of  the  construction  of  a  dam  and  the  consequent  re- 
duction of  the  water  level.  It  is  the  opinion  of  the  com- 
mittee, and  also  of  those  interested  in  the  river  traffic  whose 
testimony  is  before  the  committee,  that  the  maintenance  of 
a  permanent  water  level  at  the  elevation  of  mean  high  tide 
would  be  a  material  benefit  to  owners  of  wharf  property 
above  the  dam. 

If  the  basin  is  maintained  at  grade  8,  Boston  base,  a  depth 
equivalent  to  the  present  mean  high  water  can  be  obtained 
by  a  moderate  amount  of  dredging  in  the  canals,  and  prob- 
ably with  comparatively  small  expense  for  strengthening 
the  walls.  The  walls  along  these  canals  were  in  most  cases 
built  about  twenty  years  ago,  and  in  many  places  are  ruin- 
ous, and  must  soon  be  rebuilt  at  the  owners  expense.  It 
is  probable  that  the  dredging  of  the  canal  to  the  depth 
called  for  by  the  owners  at  the  wharves  will  result  in  many 
cases  in  causing  these  walls  to  fall  in.  The  cost  of  dredg- 
ing and  rebuilding  these  walls  and  dikes,  as  might  be 
called  for  under  a  strict  construction  of  the  owners"  de- 
mands, is  estimated  by  Mr.  Ilodgdon  to  be  $331,735.  In 
view  of  the  benefit  which  these  canals  will  receive  by  hav- 
ing a  constant  water  level,  and  of  the  fact  that  walls  will 
in  many  cases  require  rebuilding  at  an  early  date,  the  com- 
mittee feels  that  the  stipulation  by  the  owners  of  these 
premises,  if  fully  complied  with,  would  place  them  in  a 
much  better  position  than  they  now  enjoy.    Dredging  these 


COMMITTEE'S  REP<  >KT. 


27 


canals  in  the  manner  proposed  by  Mr.  Hodgdon  in  his  re- 
port, p.  ,  with  the  riprapping  of  the  slopes,  would  Leave 
the  canals  in  as  serviceable  condition  as  they  now  are  at 
mean  high  tides,  and  this  can  be  done  at  an  expense  of 
$40,000,  for  work  in  the  canals,  which  seems  to  the  com- 
mittee an  equitable  adjustment  of  the  claim.  A  moderate 
amount  of  additional  dredging  in  the  basin  would  be  re- 
quired. The  cost  of  this  would  not  exceed  $25,000.  It 
was  stated  by  counsel  for  the  owners  that  880,000  would 
probably  cover  the  cost  of  their  requirements.  An  exam- 
ination of  the  photographs  which  accompany  this  report, 
showing  the  condition  of  these  canals  at  low  water,  will 
give  some  idea  of  the  limitations  placed  upon  commerce  in 
these  canals  under  present  tidal  conditions.* 


Recommendations  . 

The  committee  recommends  that  a  dam  be  built,  suffi- 
ciently high  to  keep  out  all  tides  ;  and  that  a  fresh-water 
basin  be  maintained  at  a  permanent  level  not  below  grade 


*  The  maintenance  of  a  level  at  grade  8,  Boston  base,  would  be  a  reduction  from 
mean  high  water  level  of  2.2  feet.  Boston  base  is  .64  feet  below  mean  low  water  at  the 
Naw  Yard.  Predicted  high  tides  at  Boston  Xavy  Yard  in  1902  ranged  from  7.7  to  11.6 
feet  above  mean  low-water  level,  the  mean  rise  of  tide  in  Charles  River  being  9.6  feet 
above  mean  low- water  levei,  which  is  a  rise  equivalent  to  grade  10.24,  Boston  base. 

The  owners  of  property  on  the  Broad  and  Lechmere  canals  in  their  stipulations 
request  that,  in  case  a  dam* is  built,  these  canals  should  be  dredged  so  as  to  give  them  a 
permanent  depth,  with  the  water  at  grade  8.  which  would  be  from  1  to  2  feet  deeper  in 
the  channels  and  from  4  to  7  feet  deeper  at  the  wharves  than  the  depth  which  they  have 
at  present  upon  spring  tides  of  11  feet;  and  they  also  ask  to  be  paid  for  the  rebuilding 
of  the  walls,  which  may  be  necessitated  by  dredging  for  obtaining  this  increased  depth, 
spring  tides  of  11  feet  occur  monthly.  The  highest  predicted  tides  of  11. 5  feet  in  1902 
occur  about  four  times  during  the  year,  and  at  such  times,  for  a  period  of  three  or  four 
days,  the  rise  of  the  tide  ranges  from  11  to  11.5  or  11.6  feet. 

The  stipulation  of  the  owners  of  property  on  Broad  canal  requests  dredging  which 
would  srive  a  constant  water  level  "  between  the  river  and  the  Third  Street  draw,  to  and 
at  the  wharves,  of  18  feet,  between  the  Third  and  Sixth  Street  draws  of  not  less  than 
14  feet,  above  the  Sixth  Street  draw  to  the  railroad  draw  of  not  less  than  12  feet,  and 
above  the  railroad  draw  of  not  less  than  10  feet." 

The  owners  of  property  on  Lechmere  canal  stipulate  for  dredging  which  will  give  a 
constant  depth  of  18  feet  up  to  Sawyer's  lumber  wharf  and  14  feet  above  that  point. 

Under  present  conditions,  with  a  spring  tide  of  11  feet,  Broad  canal,  between  the 
Charles  River  and  the  Third  Street  draw,  has  a  greatest  depth  of  16.6  feet  in  the  middle 
of  the  channel,  with  from  11.6  to  13.6  feet  at  the  wharves;  between  Third  and  Sixth 
streets  it  has  a  greatest  depth  of  12.6  feet  in  the  channel,  with  from  8.6  to  10.6  feet  at 
the  wharves;  between  Sixth  Street  and  the  railroad  it  has  a  depth  of  11.6  feet  in  the 
channel  and  from  6.6  to  8.6  feet  at  the  wharves;  above  the  railroad  it  has  a  depth  of  5 
feet  in  the  channel,  and  the  canal  is  being  used  as  a  dump. 

Lechmere  canal,  with  a  spring  tide  of  11  feet,  has  a  depth  of  from  12.6  to  15.6  feet  in 
the  channel  and  from  10.6  to  11.6  feet  at  the  wharves  up  to  Sawyer's  lumber  wharf ; 
above  Sawyer's  lumber  wharf  it  lias  a  depth  of  12.6  feet  in  the  channel,  with  from  10.6 
to  11.6  feet  "at  the  wharves. 

While  owners  may  intend  to  dock  vessels  on  spring  tides,  they  cannot  take  advantage 
of  this  to  its  full  extent,  as  vessels  are  often  detained  by  head  winds  and  otherwise,  and 
the  tides  may  be  held  below  their  predicted  height  by  west  winds  or  other  causes. 

The  dredging  stipulated  for,  nevertheless,  calls  for  a  constant  depth  which  is  greater 
than  that  now  existing  upon  spring  tides  of  11  feet,  as  follozcs :  Broad  canal,  between 
the  river  and  Third  Street,  in  the  channel  1.4  feet  and  at  the  wharves  from  4.4  to  6.4 
feet;  betweenThird  and  Sixth  streets,  in  the  channel  1.4  feet  and  at  the  wharves  from 
3.4  to  5.4  feet;  between  Sixth  Street  and  the  railroad,  in  the  channel  .4  of  a  foot  ami  at 
the  wharves  from  3.6  to  5.6  feet;  above  the  railroad,  4.4  feet.  Lechmere  canal,  in  the 
channel  up  to  Sawyer's  lumber  wharf,  from  2.4  to  5.4  feet  and  at  the  wharves  from  6.4 
to  7-4  feet;  above  Sawyer's  lumber  wharf,  in  the  channel  1.4  feet  and  at  the  wharves 
from  2.4  to  3.4  feet. 

These  depths  are  taken  from  the  soundings  on  Broad  and  Lechmere  canals,  as  shown 
in  map  annexed  to  the  engineer's  report,  and  the  tide  ranges  are  taken  from  the  tide 
tables  of  the  United  States  Coast  and  Geodetic  Survey  of  1902. 


28 


CHARLES  RIVER  DAM. 


8  or  above  grade  1>.  As  this  basin  is  to  be  used  for  park 
purposes,  it  is  essential  that  the  condition  of  the  water 
should  not  only  be  harmless  to  health,  but  also  that  there 
should  be  no  suggestion  of  sewage  ;  that  the  water  be  as 
pure  as  reasonably  possible,  and  thus  both  the  factor  of 
sanitary  safety  and  the  enjoyment  of  the  water  park  be 
increased.  Therefore,  the  committee  recommends  that  cer- 
tain changes  be  made  in  the  present  systems,  which  can  be 
done  at  reasonable  expense,  and  that  the  following  changes 
be  made  conditions  precedent  to  the  building  of  the  dam. 

First.  —  That,  in  accordance  with  the  recommendations  of 
the  engineer,  all  direct  sewage  and  factory  waste  be  taken 
out  of  the  Stony  Brook  channel  and  out  of  the  Charles  River 
between  Waltham  and  Craieie  bridge  ;  that  the  connection 
between  the  new  Stony  Brook  channel  and  the  old  Stony 
Brook  channel  and  gate  house  in  the  Fens  be  constructed, 
and  that  the  old  Stony  Brook  conduit  be  rebuilt,  the  co>t  of 
both  being  $347,000,  or,  in  the  alternative,  that  the  12-foot 
conduit  recommended  in  the  report  of  the  sewer  division  of 
the  street  department  of  1901,  between  the  mouth  of  the 
Commissioners'  channel  and  Ston}r  Brook  and  Charles  River, 
be  constructed,  the  expense  of  which  is  estimated  at  $300,- 
000.  The  committee  also  accepts  the  recommendation  of 
the  engineer  that  the  Commissioners'  channel  of  Stony  Brook 
be  extended  to  Forest  Hills,  and  that  the  extension  of  the 
deep  common  sewer  to  Forest  Hills  be  built. 

Second.  —  That  a  marginal  conduit  be  built,  as  described 
in  the  engineers  report,  from  the  mouth  of  the  Fenway, 
and  preferably  from  the  overflow  outlet  of  the  St.  Mary's 
Street  sewer,  to  a  point  below  the  dam.  The  structure 
recommended  by  the  engineer  is  about  16  feet  in  width  by 
13  feet  in  depth,  and  would  probably  be  sufficient  to  convey 
the  entire  flow  of  Stony  Brook  and  the  storm  overflow  from 
all  of  the  neighboring  sewers  in  all  but  the  one  or  two  worst 

o  o 

storms  of  the  average  year  except  during  the  horns  of  ex- 
treme high  water. 

It  would  be  provided  with  tide  gates  at  its  outlet,  and  in 
moderate  storms  its  capacity  would  serve  to  store  the  flow 
entering  until  the  tide  had  fallen.  In  heavy  storms  at  ex- 
treme high  water  the  surplus  will  overflow  into  the  basin 
through  numerous  channels  designed  to  diffuse  the  discharge 
at  many  points  below  the  surface  and  to  take  their  flow  at 
or  near  mid  depth  of  the  conduit  and  thus  reject  the  float- 
ing material  and  also  the  heavier  particles. 

It  will  be  a  simple  matter  at  any  future  time  to  add  a 
propeller  pump  at  the  outlet,  operated  from  the  same  power 


(  ( IMMTTTEE'S  REPORT. 


21) 


plant  which  works  the  drawbridge  and  the  lock  gates,  by 
which  the  marginal  conduit  can  be  discharged  in  the  hours 
of  extreme  tide. 

This  marginal  conduit  should  be  constructed  at  the  same 
time  with  embankment  already  authorized  by  statute  in  the 
rear  of  Brimmer  and  Beacon  streets,  thus  saving  consider- 
able expense  in  construction.  It  would  discharge  below  the 
dam.  On  the  Cambridge  side  the  overflow  channel  from 
Binney  Street  should,  as  proposed  by  the  engineer  of  the 
committee,  be  continued  below  the  dam,  which  is  a  distance 
of  about  2,000  feet,  with  similar  arrangements  for  discharge. 
This  would  take  care  of  sewage  overflow  and  street  wash  from 
33  per  cent,  in  area  and  58  per  cent,  of  the  population  of 
Cambridge,  the  sewage  from  which  at  present  overflows  into 
the  Charles  River  above  Craigie  bridge.  The  marginal  con- 
duit on  the  Boston  side  connecting  with  the  channel  in  the 
Fens  would  furnish  a  perfect  gravity  circulation  of  fresh 
water  for  the  Fens  in  dry  weather,  the  water  flowing  from 
the  main  basin  into  the  Fens  to  the  farther  end  of  the  channel 
and  through  it  and  the  marginal  conduit  to  a  point  below  the 
dam  whenever  the  tide  outside  is  not  above  grade  (3.  In  a 
similar  way  a  gravity  circulation  for  the  Broad  and  Lech- 
mere  canals  should  be  furnished  by  a  connection  with  the 
Binney  Street  overflow  conduit. 

Third.  —  The  existing  deposits  of  sludge,  which  at  present 
fill  about  one-quarter  of  the  cubic  capacity  of  the  Fens  in- 
tended to  be  rilled  with  water,  should  be  dredged,  together 
with  certain  relatively  small  deposits  in  the  main  basin, 
mostly  near  sewer  outlets,  as  detailed  in  the  engineer's  report. 

Besides  these  three  conditions  which  the  committee  deems 
essential,  it  recommends  the  following.  The  separate  sys- 
tem of  drainage  for  the  Stony  Brook  valley  and  some  other 
portions  of  Boston,  as  recommended  in  the  report  of  the 
street  department,  sewer  division,  for  the  year  1901,  should 
be  begun  and  extended  with  reasonable  rapidity,  and  on  the 
Cambridge  side  the  separation  already  begun  should  be  ex- 
tended, beginning  with  the  upper  reaches  of  the  basin. 

Salt  water  should  not  be  admitted  into  the  basin  under 
the  fresh  water,  as  was  suggested  at  the  hearing,  nor  in  any 
other  way,  unless  under  some  unusual  condition. 

The  banks  of  the  basin  should  be  so  sloped  and  finished  as 
to  leave  no  small  pools  or  shallow  spots  for  the  breeding  of 
malarial  or  other  mosquitoes  ;  and  the  many  breeding-places 
of  these  pests  now  existing  near  this  great  water  park  should 
be  destroyed. 

It  is  important  to  preserve  the  greatest  possible  water 


30 


CHARLES  EHVEB  DAM. 


area  ;  and,  iii  building  the  embankment  on  the  Boston  side 
of  the  river,  between  the  West  Boston  and  Cottage  Farm 
bridges,  authorized  under  chapter  435  of  the  Acts  of  1893, 
to  be  constructed  300  feet  wide  in  the  rear  of  Brimmer 
Street  and  100  feet  wide  in  the  rear  of  Beacon  Street,  the 
surface  of  the  river  should  not  be  encroached  upon  more 
than  is  necessary. 

Your  committee  recommends  Craigie  bridge  as  the  site  of 
the  dam  for  the  following  reasons  :  — 

The  borings  indicate  a  <rood  foundation  there.  This  site 
continues  the  Avater  park  opposite  the  whole  of  the  Charles- 
bank,  and  brings  it  nearer  to  the  crowded  portions  of  the 
North  End  of  the  city  of  Boston.  The  chief  reason,  how- 
ever, for  the  location  decided  on,  is  that  it  will  serve  for  a 
new  bridge.  The  present  Craigie  bridge  is  old,  and  will 
soon  have  to  be  rebuilt.  It  serves  as  the  only  artery  from 
East  Cambridge  and  Somerville  to  Boston.  It  is  near  many 
of  the  large  freight  yards,  is  much  crowded  with  heavy 
teaming,  and  many  electric  cars  cro-s  it.  Blocks  are  fre- 
quent, and  property  would  undoubtedly  be  improved  in  the 
neighborhood  were  a  broader  roadway  supplied. 

Character  of  the  Structure  recommended. 

The  committee  refers  to  report  of  the  chief  engineer  for  a 
more  detailed  description  of  the  structure  which  is  recom- 
mended. 

In  brief,  it  is  intended  to  serve  both  as  a  dam  and  as  a 
bridge  and  to  have  substantially  the  construction  recom- 
mended by  the  Joint  Board  of  1894. 

That  Board  recommended  a  dam  with  a  100  foot  roadway. 
"We  suggest  that  this  width  be  increased  by  30  feet  in  order 
to  provide  a  space  of  from  15  to  25  feet  in  width  along  the 
up-stream  edge,  on  which  suitable  seats  can  be  placed,  giving 
the  inhabitants  of  the  neighboring  thickly-settled  districts 
of  Boston  and  Cambridge  convenient  opportunity  to  enjoy 
a  view  of  the  basin. 

We  also  recommend  a  somewhat  higher  grade  for  the  top 
of  the  dam  near  the  lock  and  draw,  similar  to  that  proposed 
by  the  .city  engineer  in  bridge  designs  Nos.  3  and  4,  and 
for  the  same  purpose,  namely :  to  admit  tug-boats  and 
barges  without  masts  to  pass  the  lock  without  interrupting 
the  traffic  over  the  bridge. 

We  recommend  a  lock  350  feet  in  length  between  gates 
of  a  clear  width  of  45  feet,  with  a  drawbridge  of  50  feet 
clear  opening,  with  a  depth  over  the  sill  of  the  lock  of  13 


COMMITTEE'S  REPORT. 


31 


feet  at  mean  low  water.  It  will  be  noted  that  these  dimen- 
sions of  the  lock  are  considerably  larger  than  those  recom- 
mended by  the  petitioners  or  by  the  Joint  Board  of  1*1)4. 
To  increase  them  further  would  add  an  amount  to  the  cost 
of  construction  and  maintenance  which  appears  out  of  pro- 
portion to  the  actual  or  prospective  demands  of  navigation. 

( )n  examination  of  the  various  studies  and  plans  proposed, 
including  that  of  the  Joint  Board  of  1894  on  tile  in  the  office 
of  the  State  Board  of  Health,  your  committee  felt  that  it 
was  not  necessary  to  make  fresh  detailed  drawings  for  con- 
struction, inasmuch  as  the  drawings  prepared  for  the  Joint 
Board  appear  sufficient  for  the  preliminary  estimate. 

Our  engineer  has  reviewed  these  original  drawings  and 
estimates,  and  reports  that  he  finds  no  recent  developments 
which  would  lead  to  any  material  change  except  for  the  in- 
creased quantities,  due  to  a  somewhat  larger  cross-section 
of  the  stream  at  Craigie  bridge  and  to  increased  width  of 
the  dam  and  its  greater  head  room  at  the  drawbridge. 

Making  ample  allowance  for  these  increased  quantities, 
together  with  a  margin  for  increased  cost  of  building  opera- 
tions at  the  present  time,  we  consider  that  these  additional 
expenses  will  be  covered  by  the  addition  of  $590,000  to 
the  estimate  of  the  Joint  Board,  making  the  total  cost  of  the 
dam,  including  roadway,  drawbridge  and  lock,  $1,250,000, 
or  substantially  the  same  as  the  cost  of  equivalent  bridge 
No.  3  as  estimated  by  the  city  engineer  (exclusive  of  grade 
damages) . 

Cost. 

The  cost  of  a  bridge  will  be  about  as  much,  or  perhaps 
more,  than  the  whole  cost  of  the  dam.  The  West  Boston 
bridge  is  to  cost  $2,500,000,  the  Charles  River  bridge  has 
cost  $1,500,000.  Four  estimates  have  been  made  by  the 
Boston  city  engineer  for  the  cost  of  a  new  bridge  to  replace 
the  Craigie  bridge,  the  first  being  $864,430,  the  second 
$1,148,458,  the  third  $1,463,362,  and  the  fourth  $2,044,687. 
The  cost  of  the  dam  is  stated  by  our  engineer  as  follows  : 
44  The  cost  of  the  dam,  including  bridge  and  lock  combined  j 
would  cost  but  little  if  anv  more  than  the  equivalent  bridge 
100  feet  in  width." 

As  to  the  cost  of  the  whole  undertaking,  the  darn  itself 
should  not  be  charged  to  the  basin  improvement  account, 
but  should  be  charged  to  the  same  cities  as  would  have  to 
pay  for  a  new  bridge.  The  work  required  to  be  done  in 
the  Fenway  should  be  charged  wholly  to  the  city  of  Boston  ; 
for  that  work,  already  recommended  by  Boston  officials, 


32 


CHAKLES  RIVER  DAM. 


should  be  done,  even  if  a  dam  ia  not  built.  The  construc- 
tion of  the  cnibankincnt  and  filling  in  the  rear  of  Beacon 
and  Brimmer  streets,  already  authorized  by  statute  to  be  paid 
for  by  the  city  of  Boston,  should  also  be  paid  for  by  that 
city,  excepting  whatever  excess  of  cost  may  be  necessitated 
by  the  construction  of  the  marginal  conduit  recommended  by 
your  committee.  The  cost  of  maintenance  will  be  but  little 
more  than  the  cost  of  maintaining  a  drawbridge,  which 
would  fall  in  any  case  on  the  cities  maintaining  a  bridge. 
For  this  reason  no  separate  estimate  is  included. 

The  total  cost  of  the  recommendations  of  your  committee, 
properly  chargeable  to  the  account  of  the  improvement  of 
the  basin  by  a  dam,  will  be  :  — 

Marginal  conduit  on  Boston  side  from  Leyerett  Street  to 

Fens  outlet,   .  $500,000 

Extension  Fens  outlet  to  St.  Mary's  Street,        .       .       .  200,000 
Marginal  conduit  on  Cambridge  side,        ....  150,000 

Dredging  of  basin  recommended  by  engineer,    .        .        .  25,000 
Dredging  Broad  and  Lechmere  canals  and  rebuilding  walls,  40,000 
Keeping  channels  in  and  to  Broad  and  Lechmere  canals 

open  from  ice,  capitalized,     ......  100,000 

General  contingencies,       .......  221.000 


Total,  SI, 236,000 

The  aboye  does  not  include  the  extension  of  the  Stony 
Brook  conduit  through  Fens  to  Charles  River. 

As  against  this  expenditure  the  following  saving  will  be 
effected  oyer  the  plans  of  improvement  of  the  basin  nov\'  in 
progress. 

Saving  on  sea  wall  between  Cambridge   Street  and  St. 

Mary's  Street  $173,000 

Saving  on  sea  wall  on  Cambridge  side,      ....  112,000 
Saving  on  grading  on  Cambridge  side,       ....  100,000 
Approximate  saving  on  [Metropolitan  Park  Commission  work 
for  construction  remaining  to  be  done,  in  case  water  in 
the  basin  is  held  at  grade  8,  will  be   425,000 


Total   8810,000 

From  which  it  appears  that  the  plan  here  proposed  will 
entail  an  expense  of  only  S42tf,000  above  that  of  the  treat- 
ment of  the  basin  without  a  dam,  and  this  without  including 
the  large  expense  necessary  for  dredging  in  case  the  basin  is 
adapted  for  public  use  without  the  aid  of  a  dam.*    When  in 

*  It  is  estimated  by  Percy  If.  Blake  that  the  dredging  below  the  Cambridge,  River 
Street,  bridge  to — 5  "would  cost  84Ty,16S;  while  the  dredging  above  this  bridge  would 
cost  8.~>37,777~;  total  81,016,945. 

The  engineer's  estimate  of  the  dredgin?  necessary  in  case  dam  is  built  is  825,000  in 
addition  to  that  covered  in  cost  of  materials  for  dam  "and  embankment. 


COMMITTEE'S  REPORT. 


addition  to  this  the  gain  in  public  health,  in  increased  com- 
merce and  in  public  pleasure  are  considered,  the  immediate 
carrying  out  of  the  work  recommended  would  seem  to  be  a 
measure  of  wise  public  policy  and  of  economy  as  well. 

Apportionment  . 

Your  committee  proposes  to  distribute  the  cost  of  the 
improvement  of  the  basin  proper,  seven-twelfths  to  the  city 
of  Boston,  three-twelfths  to  the  city  of  Cambridge  and  one- 
twelfth  each  to  the  city  of  Newton  and  the  town  of  Water- 
town. 

The  distribution  of  expense  just  suggested  would  assign 
the  following  amounts  to  the  different  cities  and  town  respec- 
tively :  — 

Boston,   8721,000 

Cambridge,    .     •   309,000 

Newton,   103,000 

Watertown,   103,000 

Commission  of  Construction  and  Maintenance. 

Your  committee  recommends,  as  a  commission  to  have 
charge  of  the  construction  and  maintenance  of  the  dam, 
the  mayors  of  the  cities  of  Cambridge  and  Boston,  and 
the  Metropolitan  AVater  and  Sewerage  Board  ex  officiis.  The 
latter  is  composed  of  three  members,  one  of  them  being  the 
chairman  of  the  State  Board  of  Health.  That  commission 
has  recently  constructed  some  very  large  dams,  involving 
much  greater  engineering  difficulties  than  the  dam  proposed. 
It  also  has  charge  of  the  metropolitan  drainage  systems,  and 
is  now  building  large  sewers  much  more  difficult  of  con- 
struction than  the  marginal  conduit  and  the  continuation 
of  the  Binney  Street  sewer.  It  has  in  its  employ  also 
experts  on  the  question  of  purity  of  water  and  the  dispo- 
sition of  drainage.  It  would  seem  that  no  Board  is  better 
equipped  for  constructing  this  dam  and  maintaining  the 
basin  in  good  condition  than  the  Metropolitan  Water  and 
Sewerage  Board,  with  the  help  of  the  mayors  of  the  cities 
of  Cambridge  and  Boston  and  the  city  engineers,  who  will 
act  under  the  control  of  the  mayors  of  those  cities. 

The  committee  further  recommends  that  the  following 
amendments  to  existing  acts  be  adopted  :  — 

Be  it  enacted,  etc.,  as  follows : 

Section  1.  Chapter  three  hundred  and  ninety -four  of  the  acts  of  the 
year  eighteen  hundred  and  ninety-one,  as  amended  by  section  one  of 


34 


CHARLES  EHVEB  DAM. 


chapter  four  hundred  and  thirty-live  of  the  acts  <>f  eighteen  hundred  and 
ninety-three,  is  herebj  further  amended  by  inserting  in  said  section 
one,  after  the  words  "  thence  running  southerly  by  a  straight  line",  the 
words  "or  a  curve. 1  line":  and  after  the  words,  "to  the  point  in 
Charles  river  ",  and  before  the  words,  "three  hundred  feet  distant 
westerly  ",  the  words.  -  not  less  than  one  hundred  feet  nor  more  than  "  : 
and  by  inserting  after  the  words  "  but  no  part  of  said  wall  shall  be  less 
than  one  hundred  feet  nor  more  than  three  hundred  feet  westerly  from 
said  commissioners'  line  "  :  and  by  omitting  the  word  **  straight'1,  after 
the  words  "  southerly  and  westerly  from  the  aforesaid  ",  and  before  the 
word  "line";  so  that  said  section  one,  as  amended,  shall  read  as  fol- 
lows :  "  Section  1.  The  city  of  Boston  may.  by  its  board  of  park  com- 
missioners, build  a  sea  wall  on  the  Boston  side  of  the  Charles  river  from 
the  sea  wall  of  its  present  park,  situated  between  Craigie's  bridge  and 
West  Boston  bridge,  to  the  sea  Avail  of  said  river  in  the  rear  of  Beacon 
street  in  said  city,  on  or  within  the  following  lines :  Beginning  at  a 
point  in  the  south-west  corner  of  the  stone  wall  of  the  Charles  river 
embankment,  or  Charlesbank,  thence  running  southerly  by  a  straight 
line,  or  a  curved  line,  to  a  point  in  Charles  river  not  less  than  one 
hundred  feet  nor  more  than  three  hundred  feet  distant  -westerly  from 
the  harbor  commissioners"  line,  measuring  on  a  line  perpendicular  to 
the  said  commissioners'  line  at  its  intersection  with  the  southerly  line  of 
Mount  Vernon  street :  but  no  part  of  said  wall  shall  be  less  than  one 
hundred  feet  nor  more  than  three  hundred  feet  westerly  from  said 
commissioners'  line  :  thence  continuing  southerly  and  westerly  from  the 
aforesaid  perpendicular  line,  on  such  lines,  curved  southerly  and  west- 
erly from  the  aforesaid  line,  as  said  board  of  harbor  and  land  commis- 
sioners shall  approve,  to  a  point  one  hundred  feet  or  less  distant  from 
said  sea  wall  in  the  rear  of  Beacon  street :  thence  by  a  line  parallel 
with  said  wall  to  the  westerly  line  of  the  public  park  of  said  city, 
known  as  the  Back  Bay  fens,  extended  to  intersect  said  line  parallel 
with  said  sea  wall." 

Section  2.  Section  three  of  said  chapter  four  hundred  and  thirty- 
five  of  the  acts  of  eighteen  hundred  and  ninety-three  is  amended  by 
omitting  the  words  beginning.  "  The  said  city  shall,  in  addition  to  the 
said  dredging  of  material  for  filling",  and  ending  with  the  words,  in 
their  judgment  is  an  equal  improvement  to  the  harbor  of  Boston "' ;  and 
by  inserting,  after  the  words  "  and  to  the  provisions  of  all  general 
laws  applicable  thereto",  the  words,  "but  no  compensation  shall  be 
required  by  said  board  from  the  city  of  Boston  on  account  of  said  sea 
wall  and  filling'' :  so  that  said  section  three,  as  amended,  shall  read  as 
follows  :  "  Section  3.  The  material  used  for  the  filling  authorized  by 
said  chapter  shall,  to  such  grade  as  shall  be  required  by  the  board  of 
harbor  and  land  commissioners,  be  dredged  from  Charles  Kiver  basin 
in  such  places  and  to  such  depths  as  the  said  board,  having  due  regard 
to  the  requirements  of  navigation,  the  improvement  of  said  basin  and 
the  quality  of  material  suitable  for  such  filling,  shall  from  time  to  time 
prescribe.  All  of  the  filling,  dredging  and  other  work  authorized  or 
required  by  this  act  shall  be  subject  to  the  direction  and  approval  of 
said  board  and  to  the  provisions  of  all  general  laws  applicable  thereto : 
but  no  compensation  shall  be  required  by  said  board  of  the  city  of  Bos- 
ton on  account  of  said  sea  wall  and  filling.  The  filling,  dredging  and 
other  work  authorized  by  this  act  shall  also  be  subject  to  the  approval 
of  the  secretary  of  war  and  to  all  laws  of  the  United  States  applicable 
thereto." 


(  <  >MM  [TTEE'S  REP  >KT. 


35 


Be  it  enacted,  etc.,  as  follows: 

SECTION  1.  That  chapter  five  hundred  and  thirty-one  of  the  acts  of 
eighteen  hundred  and  ninety-eight  be  so  amended  that  the  board  of 
metropolitan  park  commissioners  will  have  authority  to  build  a  bridge 
instead  of  a  dam  from  Cambridge  to  Boston  at  the  point  therein  pre- 
scribed for  building  a  dam  ;  and  that  the  provisions  of  said  chapter  for 
the  construction  of  said  dam,  as  far  as  applicable,  shall  apply  to  the 
construction  of  said  bridge. 

Section  2.    This  act  shall  take  effect  upon  its  passage. 

The  committee  submits  the  following  draft  of  a  bill :  — 

An  Act  to  authorize  the  Construction  of  a  Dam  across  the 
Charles  Riveb,  between  the  Cities  of  Boston  and  Cam- 
bridge. 

Be  it  enacted,  etc.,  as  follows: 

Section  1.  The  mayor  for  the  time  being  of  the  city  of  Boston  and 
the  mayor  for  the  time  being  of  the  city  of  Cambridge  shall,  with  the 
metropolitan  water  and  sewerage  board,  all  acting  cx  officiis,  constitute 
the  Charles  river  basin  commission. 

Section  2.  Said  commission  shall  construct,  maintain  and  operate 
a  dam  across  Charles  river,  with  a  suitable  lock,  waste  ways,  etc., 
between  Boston  and  Cambridge.  Said  dam  shall  be  substantially  at 
the  present  site  of  Craigie  bridge.  Said  dam  shall  not  be  less  than  one 
hundred  feet  in  width  at  the  top,  so  built  as  to  allow  for  a  roadway  of 
that  width,  with  drawbridge  over  the  entrance  to  the  lock,  and  shall  be 
of  sufficient  height  to  be  capable  of  holding  back  all  tides. 

Said  commission  is  authorized  to  apply  for  and  take  all  necessary 
steps  to  obtain  the  approval  of  the  secretary  of  war  or  other  proper 
authorities  of  the  United  States  for  carrying  out  the  purposes  of  this  act. 

Each  member  of  said  commission  shall  be  paid  his  actual  travelling 
expenses  and  all  such  other  expenses  as  may  be  incurred  by  him  in  the 
performance  of  his  duties  under  this  act,  as  shall  be  allowed  by  the 
governor  and  council. 

Section  3.  As  a  condition  precedent  to  the  completion  and  opera- 
tion of  said  dam,  said  commission  shall  carry  out  or  cause  to  be  carried 
out  all  the  recommendations  made  by  the  committee  on  Charles  river 
dam  appointed  under  resolves  of  nineteen  hundred  and  one,  chapter  one 
hundred  and  five,  as  amended  by  resolves  of  nineteen  hundred  and  two, 
chapter  one  hundred  and  three,  in  its  report  of  January  fourteen,  nine- 
teen hundred  and  three,  excepting  as  the  same  may  be  modified  by  said 
commission  with  the  approval  of  the  state  board  of  health. 

Section  4.  The  supreme  judicial  court  or  any  justices  thereof,  and 
the  superior  court  or  any  justices  thereof,  shall  have  jurisdiction  in 
equity  to  enforce  this  act  and  any  order  made  by  said  board  in  con- 
formity therewith.  Proceedings  to  enforce  the  same  shall  be  instituted 
and  prosecuted  by  the  attorney- general,  by  the  request  of  said  board  or 
any  other  part}-  in  interest. 

Section  5.  Said  commission  may  allow  damages  to  any  wharf 
owners  or  others  on  account  of  the  construction  and  maintenance  of  said 
dam,  and  said  board  ma}'  also  dredge  canals  between  Craigie  bridge 
and  West  Boston  bridge,  and  do  such  other  dredging  as  they  may  deem 
proper  in  said  basin :  and  may  strengthen  or  rebuild  wharves  or  other 
structures  near  said  dredging;   and  they  may  provide  for  breaking 


CHARLES  RIVER  DAM. 


channels  through  the  ire  in  winter  above  said  dam  within  the  basin  : 

and  they  may  assess  betterments  for  -aid  dredging  and  strengthening 

or  rebuilding  of  wharves  under  the  general  law  authorizing  the  ass< — 
ment  of  betterments,  with  like  remedies  to  all  parties  interested. 

Section  G.  Any  person  entitled  by  law  to  any  damage  for  taking 
of  or  injury  to  property  under  authority  of  this  act  may  appeal  from 
the  decision  of  said  commission,  within  thirty  days  of  said  decision,  to 
the  superior  court  for  the  counties  of  Suffolk  or  Middlesex,  on  petition 
therefor:  said  damages  to  be  determined  by  a  jury,  under  the  same 
rules  of  law,  as  far  as  applicable,  as  damages  are  determined  for  taking 
of  lands  for  highways,  under  the  provisions  of  law  authorizing  the 
assessment  of  betterments. 

Section  7.  To  meet  the  expenses  incurred  under  the  provision-  of 
this  act,  except  for  the  annual  repair  and  maintenance,  the  treasurer 
and  receiver-general  shall,  with  the  approval  of  the  governor  and  coun- 
cil, issue  notes,  bonds  or  scrip,  in  the  name  and  behalf  of  the  Common- 
wealth and  under  its  seal,  for  a  time  not  less  than  ten  nor  more  than 
forty  years  from  their  respective  dates,  which  shall  bear  interest  at  a 
rate  not  to  exceed  four  per  cent,  per  annum,  payable  semi-annually, 
and  to  be  designated  "  The  Charles  River  Basin  Loan,1''  and  be  issued 
as  the  governor  and  council  shall  direct. 

The  treasurer  and  receiver-general  shall  establish  a  sinking  fund  and 
apportion  an  amount  to  be  paid  each  year,  sufficient,  with  its  accumula- 
tions, to  extinguish  the  debt  at  maturity. 

Section  8.  So  much  of  the  debt  in  the  preceding  section  as  shall 
be  caused  by  the  construction  of  the  dam  itself  shall  be  apportioned  by 
said  board  on  the  basis  of  its  being  a  substitute  for  a  bridge  among  such 
cities  as  shall  be  directly  benefited  by  its  use  as  a  highway,  after  giving 
a  hearing  to  said  cities,  in  such  proportion  as  may  seem  best. 

The  cost  of  any  work  clone  hereunder  within  the  fenway  and  the  cost 
of  the  park  in  the  rear  of  Beacon  and  Brimmer  streets,  as  authorized  by 
the  acts  of  eighteen  hundred  and  ninety-one,  chapter  three  hundred  and 
forty-four,  as  amended  by  the  acts  of  eighteen  hundred  and  ninety- 
three,  chapter  four  hundred  and  thirty-five,  shall  be  charged  to  the 
city  of  Boston.  The  annual  payments  for  interest  and  sinking  fund  on 
so  much  of  the  debt  as  is  provided  for  under  this  section  shall  be  paid 
by  the  respective  cities  in  proportion  to  their  share  of  this  portion  of 
the  debt  charged  to  them  hereunder. 

Section  9.  The  annual  payments  for  interest  and  sinking  fund  on 
so  much  of  the  debt  as  is  not  already  provided  for  in  the  preceding 
section,  together  with  the  annual  cost  of  maintaining,  operating  and 
repairing  said  dam  and  basin,  and  of  other  work  done  under  authority 
of  this  act,  and  such  dredging  below  the  dam,  if  any  may  be  required 
from  time  to  time  by  the  secretary  of  war,  on  account  of  the  existence 
of  said  dam,  shall  be  paid,  seven-twelfths  by  the  city  of  Boston,  three- 
twelfths  by  the  city  of  Cambridge,  one-twelfth  by  the  city  of  Xewton 
and  one-twelfth  by  the  town  of  Watertown. 

Section  10.  The  Boston  park  commission,  duly  authorized  to  con- 
struct said  park  in  the  rear  of  Beacon  and  Brimmer  streets,  shall  con- 
struct said  park  in  a  manner  to  allow  the  commission  herein  established 
to  build  in  the  best  and  most  economical  manner  the  marginal  sewer, 
as  recommended  by  said  committee  on  the  Charles  river  dam,  which 
shall  be  completed  before  the  operation  of  said  dam. 

Section  11.  The  roadway  on  said  dam  Avithin  its  limits,  as  deter- 
mined by  said  commission,  shall  be  surfaced  or  paved,  policed  and 
maintained  by  the  cities  of  Cambridge  and  Boston :  and  all  damages 


COMMITTEE'S  REPORT. 


recovered  tD  any  action  of  law  by  reason  of  any  defect  or  want  of  repair 
in  any  such  roadway  shall  be  paid  by  such  cities  equally. 

SECTION  L2.  The  .Boston  and  Maine  railroad  shall  remove  its  freight 
bridge  next  below  said  Craigie  bridge,  and  shall  rebuild  the  same 
further  down,  so  as  to  allow  a  distance  of  at  least  four  hundred  feet 
in  the  clear  between  said  bridge  and  the  lower  face  of  said  dam,  and 
shall  remove  the  piles  of  said  old  bridge,  all  at  the  expense  of  said 
railroad  company. 

Section  13.  No  action  shall  be  taken  relative  to  dredging  or  to 
strengthening  or  rebuilding  of  wharves  under  this  act,  until  the  plans 
therefor  have  been  duly  submitted  to  the  board  of  harbor  and  land 
commissioners,  and  received  their  approval  thereon. 

Section  14.    This  act  shall  take  effect  upon  its  passage. 

HENRY  S.  PRITCHETT, 
SAMUEL  M.  MANSFIELD, 
RICHARD  H.  DANA. 

Boston,  Mass.,  Jan.  14,  1903. 


BOSTON  COLLEGE 


 wmm 

3  9031  033  43015  8 


MULTIPLE  VOLUMES  SOUND  TOGETHSR 


(BllWBlBW 18118 


